Full text of "Collections of the Illinois State Historical Library"

See other formats

PUBLIC LIPRAPY ^' *-

977.3

vtu ^ORJ WAYNE & ALLEN ©O.. IND.

411524

GENEALOGY COLLECTION

1833 02490 3079

COLLECTIONS

OF THE

ILLINOIS STATE HISTORICAL
LIBRARY

EDITED BY

CLARENCE WALWORTH ALVORD

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

VOLUME XIV

ILLINOIS
STATE HISTORICAL LIBRARY

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

EvARTS BouTELL Greene, President

Charles Henry Rammelkamp, Vice-President

Otto Leopold Schmidt, Secretary

Jessie Palmer Weber, Librarian

ADVISORY COMMISSION

EVARTS BOUTELL GrEENE

William Edward Dodd

James Alton James

Andrew Cunningham McLaughlin

William Augustus Meese

Edward Carleton Page

Charles Henry Rammelkamp

Clarence Walworth Alvord, ex officio

CONSTITUTIONAL SERIES

VOLUME II

THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEBATES

1847

COLLECTIONS OF THE ILLINOIS STATE HISTORICAL LIBRARY
VOLUME XIV

CONSTITUTIONAL SERIES, VOLUME II

THE CONSTITUTIONAL
DEBATES OF 1847

Edited with Introduction and Notes by

ARTHUR CHARLES COLE

University of Illinois

Published by the Trustees of the

ILLINOIS STATE HISTORICAL LIBRARY

SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS
19I9

The Illinois State Historical Library

PREFACE

The addition of seventy-two years to Illinois history,
and a fifth attempt to remodel her fundamental law,
have made apparent the value of publishing the debates
of the Constitutional Convention of 1847. Working in
an atmosphere of "economy, retrenchment, and re-
form," the delegated representatives of the authority
of this Commonwealth in 1847 decided to forego an
official edition of debates and content themselves with
newspaper versions. Many were aware of the service
which a collection of debates would have rendered to
other bodies similarly engaged in that time of constitu-

' tional reform; they were not so alive to their obliga-
tions to posterity and to their successors in constitu-
tional amendment in Illinois.

i The present volume is the result of an effort to re-

construct the records of this convention. The most

I complete single account available was found in the
tri- weekly edition of the Illinois State Register; strangely
enough, however, the weekly edition often contained

'^ more detailed accounts of certain addresses and debates.

..■ The reporters were not always prompt in their arrival
nor were they always able to hear what was said. The

,v^ Register, too, was not always ready to devote space to
the utterances of party opponents. It left this obliga-
tion to its rival, the Sangamo Journal. No other papers
in Illinois attempted to present a running record of the
debates. Newspaper correspondents were at the con-
vention in force but at best they were satisfied with

iv ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

making daily memoranda of the topics discussed, of the
trend of the debates, and of the current political gossip.
The version presented in this volume is the Register
tri-weekly account supplemented in important omis-
sions by items from the weekly edition and from the
Sangamo Journal.

The preparation of this volume has been made
possible by the codperation of Mrs. Jessie Palmer Weber
of the Illinois State Historical Library and of Dr. W. F.
Dodd of the Illinois Legislative Reference Bureau. The
newspaper files used in the text were those of the Illinois
State Historical Library. They have been supple-
mented for editorial work by the files of the Chicago
Historical Society, of the Newberry Library, Chicago,
of the Library of Congress, and of the Illinois Historical
Survey. The index has been prepared for the practical
use of students of political science by Miss Ethel Gwinn,
working under the direction of Professor John A.
Fairlie. I am especially indebted to Miss Nellie C.
Armstrong, who, in the capacity of editorial assistant,
has shown the greatest zeal and care in collating and
proof-reading.

Arthur C. Cole

Urbana, Illinois

January, 1920

CONTENTS

Introduction xv

I. Monday, June 7, 1847 i

The convention assembled; credentials of members presented;
president, secretary, sergeant-at-arms elected; printing of the debates
discussed; "economy, retrenchment and reform".

II. Tuesday, June 8 9

Employment of additional officers discussed; authority of conven-
tion to limit pay of members and officers; report of Committee on
Rules adopted.

III. Wednesday, June 9 22

Legislative powers of the convention discussed; employment of
additional officers considered; pay of members of convention; ad-
ditional officers elected.

IV. Thursday, June 10 42

Length of daily sessions decided upon; presentation of various

resolutions pertaining to organization.

V. Friday, June ii 45

Reconsideration of the rules of the convention; debate on
advisability of taking up resolutions on three great departments of
government; resolutions discussed in Committee of the Whole.

VI. Monday, June 14 65

Standing committees announced; discussion as to form of procedure
in "the amendment, revision or alteration" of the constitution; pres-
entation of resolutions on subjects of banking, executive authority,
state borrowing power; discussion as to advisability of printing debates.

VII. Tuesday, June 15 82

Presentation of resolutions on subjects of judiciary, state borrowing

power, veto power, manner of elections, term and salary of governor
and members of General Assembly; discussion on bank question.

vi CONTENTS

VIII. Wednesday, June i6 90

Debate on subject of poll tax as remedy for state debt.

IX. Thursday, June 17 ' . . 100

Bank question debated; presentation of "equal rights" petition;
abolition of county commissioners' court discussed; presentation of
resolutions on subjects of lotteries, divorces, abolishing office of probate
justice and county recorder, banking.

X. Friday, June 18 no

Resolution prohibiting formation of new counties less than four
hundred square miles in area; debate on resolution; debate on question
of limiting numbers of the General Assembly.

XI. Saturday, June 19 127

Debate on numbers of General Assembly; on county representative

system; "economy, retrenchment and reform."

XII. Monday, June 21 153

Debate on county representative system; on representation based on
population; presentation of "equal rights" petition.

XIII. Tuesday, June 22 159

Appointment of committee to apportion state into senatorial and
representative districts; presentation of resolutions on courts of chan-
cery and common law; discussion on election of secretary; debate on
subject of banks; presentation of resolution concerning suffrage.

XIV. Wednesday, June 23 171

Presentation of resolutions concerning education; debate on invest-
ment of school funds in state bonds; discussion on subject of revenue.

XV. Thursday, June 24 190

Presentation of resolutions from Committee on Organization of
Departments and Officers connected with the Executive Department;
on taxation of government lands; on prohibition of dueling; rate of
maximum taxation; limitation of power of legislature; agricultural
resources of state; pay of members of convention; amendments to new
constitution; prohibition of immigration of free negroes.

XVI. Friday, June 25 210

Immigration of free negroes; suffrage rights of citizens of other states;
debate on subject of negro rights.

CONTENTS vii

XVII. Saturday, June 26 229

Petition prohibiting immigration of negroes to and emancipation of

negroes in state; debate on subject of negro rights; personal difficulties
in Committee on Education.

XVIII. Monday, June 28 251

Resolutions concerning banking; debate on bank question.

XIX. Tuesday, June 29 267

Debate on the subject of banks; question of absolute or temporary
prohibition; liability of directors and stockholders.

XX. Wednesday, June 30 284

Consideration of report of Committee on the Legislative Depart-
ment; debate on length and frequency of legislative sessions.

XXI. Thursday, July i 289

Presentation of resolutions; debate on length and frequency of

legislative sessions, continued; on qualifications of representatives and
senators; on numbers of representatives and senators.

XXII. Friday, July 2 299

Discussion concerning pay of convention members; revision of com-
mittee report, continued; time of meeting of legislature; officers of two
houses and quorum; passage of bills.

XXIII. Monday, July 5 305

Report of Committee on the Legislative Department discussed; pay

of members of legislature; eligibility to office; suits against the state;
sale of lands; special legislation.

XXIV. Tuesday, July 6 312

Reports from Committee on Incorporations presented; from Com-
mittee on the Division of the State into Counties; report of Committee
on the Legislative Department discussed; debate on section 31 of the
report.

XXV. Wednesday, July 7 324

Report of Committee on the Legislative Department discussed;
discussion on special legislation; on banks; question of representative
apportionment.

viii CONTENTS

XXVI. Thursday, July 8 338

Newspaper misrepresentation of convention delegates; limitation of
length and frequency of speeches of delegates; resolutions of sympathy
to the families of Hardin, Zabriskie, and Houghton; eulogy; considera-
tion of report of Committee on the Legislative Department; question
of representation; state debt.

XXVII. Friday, July 9 356

Report of Committee on the Legislative Department; supplies,

printing, etc., for the legislature; life, liberty, and property guaranteed;
report of Committee on the Executive Department; governor's term of
ofBce, date of election, eligibility to office, age requirement; debate on
Native Americanism.

XXVIII. Saturday, July 10 375

Report of Committee on the Executive Department; debate con-
cerning governor's salary.

XXIX. Monday, July 12 383

Report of Committee on the Executive Department; governor's

salary; resolution concerning Mr. Hale's denunciation of the Mexican
War.

XXX. Thursday, July 15 391

Report of Committee on the Executive Department; pardoning

power; special sessions of legislature.

XXXI. Friday, July 16 395

Adoption of additional rules of procedure; report of Committee on
the Executive Department; special sessions of legislature; duties of
lieutenant-governor; signing of bills; veto power.

XXXII. Saturday, July 17 424

Veto power; appointment or election of secretary of state; compen-
sation of secretary of state.

XXXIII. Monday, July 19 446

Resolutions on the deaths of Lieutenants Fletcher, Robbins, and
Ferguson; report of Committee on the Judiciary; classes of courts,
regulation by constitution or legislature; jurisdiction of various courts;
personnel of supreme court.

CONTENTS ix

XXXIV. Tuesday, July 20 457

Resolutions concerning state debt; discontinuance of practice of

opening sessions with prayer; report of Committee on the Judiciary;
election or appointment of judges.

XXXV. Wednesday, July 21 469

Report of Committee on the Judiciary; election of judges; district
system or general; term of judges.

XXXVI. Thursday, July 22 485

Discussion concerning treatment of clergymen in the convention;
report of Committee on the Judiciary; number of districts; appoint-
ment or election of judges.

XXXVII. Friday, July 23 498

Reportof Committee on the Judiciary; number of districts; supreme
court sessions; reference of report to a special committee; report of
Committee on the Organization of Departments; auditor of public
accounts; state treasurer; report of Committee on Elections and Right
of Suffrage; qualifications for right of suffrage.

XXXVIII. Monday, July 26 519

Resolution concerning restoration of practice of opening convention

sessions with prayer; discussion as to propriety of printing various
propositions; discussion on the subject of a new carpet.

XXXIX. Tuesday, July 27 524

Right of suffrage; effect on immigration; right of state to control
suffrage; Native Americanism.

XL. Wednesday, July 28 551

Right of suffrage; lengthy debate on extension of suffrage to foreign-

XLI. Thursday, July 29 581

Right of suffrage; debate continued; date of elections fixed; report
of Committee on the Mihtia.

XLII. Friday, July 30 615

Report of Committee on Revenue; debate on subject of poll tax; on
its application to foreigners.

X CONTENTS

XLIII. Saturday, July 31 628

Discussion concerning date of adjournment of convention; report of
Committee on the Revenue; taxation of "corporations and govern-
ments;" minimum land valuation; exemption from taxation.

XLIV. Monday, August 2 636

Report of Committee on the Revenue; exemptions from taxation;
sale of lands for taxation.

XLV. Tuesday, August 3 640

Report of Committee on Incorporations; debate on subject of bank-
ing; liability of corporation members for corporation debts.

XLVI. Wednesday, August 4 658

Continuation of debate on the bank question; absolute prohibition
or regulated system of banking; submission of question separately to
people.

XLVII. Thursday, August 5 674

Continuation of debate on the bank question; responsibility of cor-
poration members for corporation debts and liabilities.

XLVIII. Friday, August 6 695

Report of Committee on the Legislative Department, as amended in
committee of the whole.

XLIX. Saturday, August 7 701

Resolutions of sympathy upon the death of Captain Franklin Niles;
report of Committee on the Legislative Department; eligibility of
state officers to other offices; impeachment; special legislation; ques-
tion of bank.

L. Monday, August 9 707

Bank question; limitation upon legislative power; separate sub-
mission of bank question to people; impeachment; eligibility to seats
in the General Assembly; oath of office; granting of divorces; suits
against the state; lotteries; sale of lands belonging to individuals.

LI. Tuesday, August id 722

Exemption of freehold from execution; division of state into repre-
sentative and senatorial districts; personal liberty rights; census;
apportionment of senators and representatives; state appropriations;
monopolies.

CONTENTS xi

LII. Wednesday, August II 730

Apportionment of representatives; provisions concerning state
printing, binding, fuel, etc.; sale of land for taxes; amendment of bank
charter; review of report of Committee on the Executive Department.

LIII. Thursday, August 12 741

Consideration of report of Committee on the Executive Department;
report of Committee on the Judiciary; mode of selecting supreme court
judges; classes of courts; personnel of supreme court.

LIV. Friday, August 13 761

Mode of selecting judges; rotation of terms of office; jurisdiction;
place of sessions of supreme court; county courts; county justices.

LV. Saturday, August 14 770

County courts and justices; mode of selecting justices; court of
probate; quarterly terms of probate court; jurisdiction; duties of
county judge; appointment of committee to provide for submission of
constitution to people.

LVI. Monday, August 16 775

County courts; clerk of county courts; authority of legislature to
reorganize county court system; compensation of judges; justices of the
peace.

LVII. Tuesday, August 17 787

Jurisdiction of justice of peace; attorney-general; prosecuting attor-
ney; county prosecuting attorney; fees of attorneys; clerk of circuit
court; clerk of supreme court; commissioning of judicial officers by
governor; form of judicial documents.

LVIII. Wednesday, August 18 800

Division of state into judicial circuits; cost of system; terms of
court in each circuit; salary of judges; eligibility to other offices;
requirements for office; length of term; prohibition of banks; report of
Committee on Commons; poll tax.

LIX. Thursday, August 19 812

Division of state into representative and senatorial districts; revenue;
poll tax; sale of lands for taxes; valuation of property.

xii CONTENTS

LX. Friday, August 20 821

Formation of new counties; report of Committee on Law Reform;
report of Committee on Townships.

LXI. Saturday, August 21 839

Printing of constitution in German and Norwegian; time of adjourn-
ment of convention; pay of members; Bill of Rights; right of abolish-
ing the constitution.

LXII. Monday, August 23 854

Bill of Rights; religious freedom; freedom of election; civil and
political rights of negroes; trial by jury; search and seizure; necessity
for indictment by grand jury; bail; penalties; imprisonment for debt;
ex post facto laws.

LXIII. Tuesday, August 24 869

Prohibition of dueling; rights of negroes; right of peaceable assem-
bly; mode of levying tax; right to reform government; freedom of
press; division of senatorial and representative districts.

LXIV. Wednesday, August 25 879

Senatorial and representative districts; report of Committee on
Finance; three mill tax; three grand judicial circuits; appeal from
circuit courts; report of Committee on Law Reform; codification of
laws.

LXV. Thursday, August 26 897

Adoption of new convention rules; report of Committee on Educa-
tion; duties of superintendent of schools; educational needs of state.

LXVI. Friday, August 27 922

Education; mode of selecting superintendent of schools; govern-
ment money for schools; report of Committee on Revision; amend-
ment of constitution; question of finance.

LXVII. Saturday, August 28 931

Collection of taxes; state debt; printing of constitution; distribution
of constitution among foreign population.

LXVIII. Monday, August 30 941

Time of elections; copies of the Journal of the Convention to each
delegate.

CONTENTS xi

LII. Wednesday, August II 730

Apportionment of representatives; provisions concerning state
printing, binding, fuel, et(i; sale of land for taxes; amendment of bank
charter; review of report of Committee on the Executive Department.

LIII. Thursday, August 12 741

Consideration of report of Committee on the Executive Department;
report of Committee on the Judiciary; mode of selecting supreme court
judges; classes of courts; personnel of supreme court.

LIV. Friday, August 13 761

Mode of selecting judges; rotation of terms of office; jurisdiction;
place of sessions of supreme court; county courts; county justices.

LV. Saturday, August 14 770

LVI. Monday, August 16 775

County courts; clerk of county courts; authority of legislature to
reorganize county court system; compensation of judges; justices of the
peace.

LVII. Tuesday, August 17 787

LVIII. Wednesday, August 18 800

LIX. Thursday, August 19 812

Division of state into representative and senatorial districts; revenue;
poll tax; sale of lands for taxes; valuation of property.

xii CONTENTS

LX. Friday, August 20 821

Formation of new counties; report of Committee on Law Reform;
report of Committee on Townships.

LXI. Saturday, August 21 839

Printing of constitution in German and Norwegian; time of adjourn-
ment of convention; pay of members; Bill of Rights; right of abolish-
ing the I

LXII. Monday, August 23 854

LXIII. Tuesday, August 24 869

Prohibition of dueling; rights of negroes; right of peaceable assem-
bly; mode of levying tax; right to reform government; freedom of
press; division of senatorial and representative districts.

LXIV. Wednesday, August 25 879

LXV. Thursday, August 26 897

Adoption of new convention rules; report of Committee on Educa-
tion; duties of superintendent of schools; educational needs of state.

LXVI. Friday, August 27 922

Education; mode of selecting superintendent of schools; govern-
ment money for schools; report of Committee on Revision; amend-
ment of constitution; question of finance.

LXVII. Saturday, August 28 931

Collection of taxes; state debt; printing of constitution; distribution
of constitution among foreign population.

LXVIII. Monday, August 30 94 1

Time of elections; copies of the Journal of the Convention to each
delegate.

CONTENTS xiii

LXIX. Tuesday, August 31 944

Adoption of constitution; provisions for signing by absent members;
adjournment of convention.

Biographical Appendix 949

List of members; biographical sketches.

Bibliography 987

Index 999

Name index; articles and sections; subject index.

INTRODUCTION

A little over two decades of development under its
original charter of statehood brought Illinois to the
point where it chafed at the restraints of its constitu-
tional swaddling clothes. The movement for a new
constitution, therefore, received definite recognition in
the legislative session of 1840-1841 when a joint resolu-
tion to refer the question of a Constitutional Conven-
tion to the popular vote received more than the two-
thirds vote required by the fundamental law. The
Belleville Advocate soon listed seventeen reasons for a
convention and in successive issues proceeded to explain
them to its readers, who seem to have responded
favorably to the program set forth.^ Most of the
political spokesmen of the day, however, hesitated to
place specific reasons for a convention before the voters
with the result that the election of August i, 1842,
revealed a serious indifference on the part of the elector-
ate and the proposition failed to secure the required
majority.

Again in 1845 the General Assembly moved to
submit the proposition to the electorate and this time
the convention backers carried the day by a vote of
57,806 to 18,568.' There followed a fight between
northern Illinois and Egypt as to whether the census
of 1 840 or the figures of 1 845 should be used as a basis

^Belteville Advocate, October 21, December 2, 9, 1841.

^The figures in the Secretary of State's Records of Election Returns, 1:364-365,
are too incomplete for citation.

'Records of Election Returns, 1:476-477. Tlie gubernatorial contest of the
same year drew out 100,847 votes. Both elections were held on August 3, 1846.

xvi ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

for apportionment. In this skirmish the northern
advocates of the 1 845 basis were successful in securing
for their section the advantage of its rapid growth
during the forties. On April ig, 1847, the election of
delegates took place. By this time the party leaders
were trying to define a strategy which would enable
them to control the situation. The Democrats became
more and more vocal on the importance of an anti-bank
provision, of popular election of state officials, including
even supreme court judges, of an effective veto power,
and of insuring the infusion of pure democratic princi-
ples into the fundamental law. The Whigs openly
accepted the popular demand for economy and reform;
inwardly they nursed hopes of excluding foreigners
from suffrage by a citizenship qualification and of
inserting a clause permitting some sort of a banking
system. The Democrats hauled out the obligation of
party regularity while the Whigs concealed their
ambitions in a subtle insinuating appeal to a "no
party" stand.^ When at length the results of the
election were tabulated it was found that while the
Democrats had elected a safe majority with gi out of
the 162 delegates, the Whigs were represented in
sufficient force to occasion a grave element of uncer-
tainty in the work of the convention.

The Constitutional Convention which assembled at
Springfield, June 7, 1847, included only 7 native Illi-
noisians. There were 26 New Englanders, 38 from
the middle states, 35 from the South Atlantic seaboard,
41 from Kentucky and Tennessee, and 10 from Ohio

*See Campbell's complaint against this "no party" trick, post, 480: "He
scorned such tricks, preferring the bold, manly course of a whig like Harry of the
West, who never said 'no party.' " See also Illinois Stale Register, April 2.

INTRODUCTION xvii

and Indiana.^ Here was eloquent testimony to the
westward course of empire. Of the delegates, the
farmers with 75 were most numerous, but there were
54 lawyers, besides 12 physicians, g merchants, 5
mechanics, and 7 others. It was a body of young men
nearer in age to the two twenty-six-year-old delegates
than the sage of sixty-six.

Several members brought to the convention valued
experiences garnered in long and active political careers.
The most conspicuous of these was Zadoc Casey, of
Mt. Vernon, whose public services had already included
a term as lieutenant-governor, and five terms in Con-
gress. At the age of fifty-one, however, he seems to
have lost much of his vigor of action, so that the quiet
influence of his presence was greater than that of his
utterances before the convention; there was complaint,
indeed, that instead of participating in the debates and
giving the delegates the benefit of his age and experience,
he offered "nothing but continual croaking, adjourn!
adjourn. "«

The group of more active participants in the con-
vention debates included delegates in various stages of
their public careers. William R. Archer, a rising young
lawyer from Pittsfield, displayed qualities of leadership
which explain his later political activity. Albert G.
Caldwell, a Shawneetown attorney, Charles H. Con-
stable, an influential Whig leader and state senator,
were frequently on the floor of the convention. Thomp-
son Campbell of Galena, who had for four years
rendered capable service as secretary of state, was an

^ Five of foreign birth included three from Scotland and one each from Germany
and Ireland. See list of members; cf. AUon Telegraph and Democratic Review,
July 9.

^ See, post, 843.

xviii ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

energetic and eloquent spokesman of the Democratic
faith. John Dement, the Dixon delegate, by his
activity qualified for his later services in the constitu-
tional conventions of 1862, and 1869-1870. Ninian
W. Edwards, an agressive veteran Whig legislator from
Springfield, David L. Gregg, an influential Chicagoan
of opposite stripe, Samuel S. Hayes, the twenty-six-
year-old delegate from Carmi, and Lincoln B. Knowlton,
the eloquent Peoria lawyer, were frequently on the
floor. Samuel D. Lockwood of Jacksonville, and
Stephen T. Logan of Springfield, two staunch conserva-
tive Whig veterans, honored the convention with the
experiences of their long political careers. The young
lawyer from Carlinville, John M. Palmer, at this
convention laid the foundations for the brilliant career
which lay ahead of him. Judge Walter B. Scates of Mt.
Vernon, was one of the most active influences in the
convention. James W. Singleton of Mt. Sterling,
Archibald Williams of Quincy, and David M. Woodson
of Carrollton, aggressively upheld the Whig cause
against the attacks of various capable Democratic
opponents, among whom were Francis C. Sherman
of Chicago, and Hezekiah M. Wead, a lawyer from
Lewistown.'

The organization of the convention by the Demo-
cratic majority with Newton Cloud of Waverly as
presiding officer, removed the potent influence of this
preacher-farmer-legislator from the active counsels of
the convention. The Whigs did not place a party
candidate in the field but aided in the election of Cloud

'During the early days of the session a contemporary critic complained of an
unwarrantable propensity for making speeches among " the unfledged politicians,
and embryo statesmen." Allan Telegraph and Democratic Review, June 25.

INTRODUCTION xix

over Zadoc Casey.' Henry W. Moore, a Gallatin
County lawyer, was engaged to act as secretary and
John A. Wilson as sergeant-at-arms.

The convention was now ready to proceed. The
Sangamon County Whig delegates, Edwards and Logan,
proposed, on the basis of economy, to ignore the legis-
lative arrangement for the election of a printer with a
fixed compensation and to let the work to the lowest
responsible and capable bidder. They also opposed the
election of assistant secretaries and of an assistant to the
sergeant-at-arms. The Whig keynote, "economy, re-
trenchment, and reform," had already been sounded by
Benjamin Bond of Carlyle, in a successful appeal to the
convention to Hmit the number and pay of officers of
the convention. The Democrats, unwilling to lose the
fruits of their victory at the polls, challenged such
economy and fought to rescind the Bond resolution;
they claimed that all matters pertaining to the number
and pay of officers had been settled in the legislative
act which ordered the convention. They challenged
the brand of economy that involved days of debate and
a protracted session in order to save a few salary items.
At length by sheer weight of numbers the Democrats
won out and later elected the additional officers. The
four days of debate on these preliminary questions
seem not to have been entirely wasted. The discussion
on economy developed into a consideration of the
relative powers of the legislative authority of the state
and of the convention; and while certain Democratic
members regarded the Whig economy stand as involv-

'The Democratic caucus was unable to agree upon a candidate. Casey was
brought forward as an anti-bank man and Dement withdrew in his favor; Cloud
was supported by the advocates of a regulated banking system. Chicago Democrat,
June 15, 22.

XX ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ing a waste of time "spent in demagogueism, in making
speeches for Buncome,"' others, Hke Campbell of Jo
Daviess, agreed with their opponents that the discussion
was worth while because of its value in clearing up
questions and enabling members "ta arrive at the true
principles on which they should act/'^"

The sixth day of the convention completed the
preliminary work of organization. The rules of the
convention had been agreed upon. Standing com-
mittees had been announced, and the order of procedure
defined. The original constitution was to be read
article by article and section by section and the amend-
ing propositions were to be referred for consideration
to appropriate committees. On the fourth day, Wood-
son had presented a set of resolutions defining the
authority of the three departments of state govern-
ment; this proved to be an attempt, on the part of at
least certain Whigs, to steal a march on their opponents,
and after an extended debate the formal order of proce-
dure was agreed upon.

On June 14, the question of the advisability of
printing the debates was raised. Lanphier and Walker,
who had been chosen official printers, were publishing
in the Siaie Register a record which, although fairly
comprehensive, reflected the lack of formal obligation
to present an accurate and complete account. The
Register left to its rival, the Sangamo Journal, the
opportunity of doing justice to addresses by Whig
delegates. The reporters in any case defined their
obligations in terms of journalistic practice rather than
in terms of historical accuracy. But while the debate

^Ste post, 30.
'"Seepoi/, 38; cf. 31,

INTRODUCTION xxi

brought out a substantial agreement that "the pub-
Hshed reports of the speeches of members of this body,
as found in the newspapers of this city, are very inac-
curate and faulty,"" considerations of economy bore
down the proposition for an official version; and the
suggestion that the members personally contribute to
the expenses of publishing the debates was never
formally considered.

The convention of 1847 performed its task in a day
when party allegiance weighed heavily upon the voter
and his representative. The delegates in this case had
been chosen primarily upon party lines altered to some
extent by complex sectionalistic forces. The most
fundamental force was the cleavage between the
Democratic apostles of human rights and Whig cham-
pionship of the rights of property. The Whigs trembled
before the menace of "radicalism," of "Locofocoism;"
the Democrats were kept in a state of terror by the
incubus of "bankism" and its companion bogies. But
sectional influences at times not only allayed these fears
but even produced Whig "radicals" and Democratic
"bankites."

The Whig delegates went to the convention with a
strong conviction that it was their duty to "dull the
edge of radicahsm, " to keep the new constitution from
being made the "plaything of Locofocoism. "'^ From
the very start radicalism seemed to show "its cloven
foot in the proceedings of the dominant party," but the

"See post, 75. Members frequently found it necessary to correct the news-
paper accounts. See note 3, page 20, note 9, page 48, note 17, page 89. As
influential a delegate as Scates commented on omissions as follows: "He would also
state that there was no fear of his speeches being published; the reporters never
reported him. He had made no arrangements with them for that purpose." See
post, 792.

^^ Chicago Daily Journal, April 22; cf. Belleville Advocate, June 3.

xxii ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Whigs were pleasantly surprised with the conservatism
that revealed itself in a majority of the body." On
many points, too, Whigs could not but yield to the
democratic trend of the age. But on questions that
permitted a party alignment they rallied their forces
almost to a man.'*

The supreme test of strength between the conven-
tion parties came over the question of bank or no bank.
The Democrats, who had for years been insisting that
bank charters were "inconsistent with democracy or
religion,"" who had sought to arouse the people against
efforts to renew "the miserable rag system by which
they have already lost so much,"'" had raised this issue
in the convention election. The Whigs, fearful of the
"popular clamor" against banks, had evaded the
question except in their own strongholds." The
election revealed not only a remarkable showing for the
Whig candidates but even the election of a considerable
group of "bank Democrats." The tendency of leading
Democratic spokesmen to turn the "bank Democrats"
over to the opposition,'* no doubt consolidated the
pro-bank party and made it a conservative force by
which other Whig propositions were carried.

In organizing the convention the bank party had
supported Newton Cloud, as favorable to banks under

^^ Chicago Daily Journal, June 14; Alton Telegraph and Democratic Review,
June II, 25. The Telegraph actually forecast a constitution "that will be satis-
factory to the people, and beneficial to the State."

^*Illinois State Register, July 31, August 6; Shawneetown Democrat, in
Chicago Democrat, August 24.

^^ Chicago Democrat, January 26, 1846.

^^Joliet Democrat, in ihid., July 18, 1846.

^'' Chicago Daily Journal, March 18; Sangamo Journal, April 29; cf. Illinois
State Register, July i.

""We freely turn over to their aid every bank democrat in the State (if there
is such a white blackbird)." Chicago Democrat, April 6; cf. ibid., April 13.

INTRODUCTION xxiii

proper restrictions, over Casey, a straight-out anti-bank
man. So the bank issue was in the foreground from
the very start. Lines were drawn between those in
favor of a complete prohibition of banks and those
willing to accept a properly safeguarded general banking
system."

On June 14, in spite of the fact that the convention
had voted a regular order of procedure which made such
action premature, anti-bank resolutions were intro-
duced by Markley and Pratt and the rules suspended
to permit their reference. From this time the bank
question was almost daily before the convention,
consuming a large share of its time and efforts. On
fourteen days of the session it was the direct subject of
debate and was almost as frequently linked with other
questions that came up. On June 15, Hurlbut brought
up a resolution in favor of the liberal New York system
of banking. Opportunity was then afforded to take
test votes which resulted in a rejection of both the New
York system and the prohibition proposition.^") Only
fifty-two Democrats and six Whigs from southern
counties lined up for complete restriction; it was as
much a case of northern Illinois versus Egypt as Whig
versus Democrat. On June 11, Gregg of Cook County
introduced resolutions to inquire into the expediency of
a highly restrictive general banking law. The fight
then centered on the question of absolute prohibition
or a regulated system. The committee on incorpora-
tions finally brought in a majority report for restriction

"According to an early canvass only one Whig, Davis of Bond, was for prohi-
bition while two Democratic members from Will, two from Morgan, two from Du
Page, one from Cook, and probably others were opposed to absolute prohibition.
Chicago Daily Journal, June ii\ cf. Illinois State Register, June 19, 24.

''^Illinois State Register, June 24, 25.

xxiv ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

and a minority report for prohibition.^^ In the first
half of August this question was contested to a decision.
The final result was an article prohibiting a state bank,
but permitting the legislature to enact laws authorizing
corporations or associations with banking powers
provided that they should not go into effect until sub-
mitted to the popular vote.

The Whigs made their first offensive move in pro-
posing a poll tax on June i6. They defended it on the
basis that every class, and not merely the property
holders, should bear a share of the public burdens.
Democratic spokesmen exploded the assumption that
non-property-holders did not contribute to the support
of the state and condemned the tax as wrong in princi-
ple. After a long discussion the poll tax proposition
was carried, io8 to 49, leaving the levy of the tax to the
discretion of the legislature. The Democratic support
of this proposition came largely from southern Illinois. -^

The Democrats had always charged their opponents
with nativism; the debates at the convention of 1847
showed that this charge was not without a foundation
of truth. This was first suggested in the proposal that
"no person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of
the United States at the time of the adoption of this
constitution, shall be eligible to the office of Governor;"
the Whigs generally took a stand in favor of this
provision or of Logan's amendment requiring a fourteen-
year residence period of naturalized citizens. The
party line was even more sharply defined later when the

2' Harvey presented the majority report and Kinney the minority. Both were
Democrats. See poj/, 312-315.

"See Chicago Democrat, June 22. Wead and Farwell objected to this
special burden upon residents of the state while non-residents " by whom the greater
part of the land in our state was owned, paid none of it." See post, 622, 624.

INTRODUCTION xxv

suffrage question came up and the Whigs insisted upon
a citizenship quahfication for all who should in the
future immigrate to lUinois. The Democrats generally
defended the right of foreigners to a voice in elections
but defection from their ranks enabled the Whigs to
carry their point for what they considered a true
Americanism. 23

In the matter of the veto power the Whigs won
another victory. The Democrats had come to the
convention with a strong determination to provide for
an effective gubernatorial veto sufficiently guarded
from abuse. In general they preferred that a veto
should be overriden by nothing short of a two-thirds
vote. The Democratic leaders eloquently expounded
their position and cracked the whip to bring their
followers Into line; but when the constitution took
shape, the Whigs rejoiced in an arrangement which
permitted the same majority which should have passed
a law in the first instance, to enact it over the guber-
natorial veto.

Most Whigs, as well as Democrats, had yielded to
the democratic tendency toward a popular election of
state officials, toward even an elective judiciary.
Largely for political reasons, which received strong
sectional reinforcement, they advocated the proposition
of having the supreme court consist of three judges
elected by the three respective sections of the state.
The Democrats favored the general ticket system of
election which would enable them to control the entire
body by capitalizing their numerical superiority.
After a long verbal battle it was agreed that the state

'^Illinois Stale Register, July 27, 29, August 26; Journal of the Convention, 206,
207.

xxvi ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

should be divided into three grand divisions and the
qualified electors of each division should elect one of
the judges for a period of nine years, with the proviso
that after the first election the general assembly might
have the power "to provide by law for their election by
the whole state, or by divisions," as it might deem
expedient. This was clearly a compromise arrange-
ment.

A lively skirmish took place over negro immigration
into the state. A little corporal's guard of anti-slavery
men went to the convention determined not only to
incorporate a slavery prohibition into the constitution
but also to remove any legal basis for acknowledging
its existence in other states. The Covenanters of Perry
County and citizens of Randolph County encouraged
them with petitions praying the abolition of all civil
and political distinctions on account of color and the
motion by Whitney of Boone County to strike out
"white" in the resolution defining the franchise arrayed
the seven champions of negro rights against the 137
other delegates. ^^

Next, Bond of Clinton County brought in a resolu-
tion in favor of an article prohibiting the immigration
of free negroes into the state. This precipitated a
heated debate with dramatic scenes. Again party lines
broke down and northern delegates wrestled against
the power of southern and central lUinois.^^ The
committee on the Bill of Rights eventually brought in a
section instructing the legislature to enact laws to
prohibit negro immigration. It was later decided,

^Stepost, lojtf., 170 fF.

2^0n a test vote of eighty-seven to fifty-six, only eleven Democrats voted in the
negative. Only five votes came from delegates representing counties south of
Morgan County. Journal of the Convention, 455-456.

INTRODUCTION ' xxvii

however, to make an independent article of the negro
immigration restriction with provision for separate
ratification. A numerous minority tried to secure the
adoption of clauses prohibiting the extension of suffrage
to negroes and mulattoes, rendering them ineligible to
hold office, and prohibiting the intermarriage of blacks
and whites. It was pointed out, however, that this
was an impHed admission of their possession of such
rights as citizens of Illinois and of the United States and
such clauses were accordingly omitted from the consti-
tution.

While the Illinois convention of 1 847 worked at its
tasks, war was raging between the United States and the
Mexican republic to the south. Abraham Lincoln in
behalf of Illinois Whiggery, claimed that the war had
been "unnecessarily and unconstitutionally commenced
by the President." On July 11, 1847, the Reverend
Albert Hale, pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church
of Springfield, delivered two sermons in which he boldly
proclaimed the injustice of the national cause and its
demoralizing effect upon the nation. In the course of
his remarks he was said to have stated that the volun-
teer, who was just then being welcomed back as a hero,
had been transformed by the war into a "moral pest
to society."^^

Mr. Hale was one of the local clergymen who had
officiated in the convention at the opening prayers.
On July 12, Akin of Franklin county denounced Hale's
preaching before the convention and proposed that the
clergyman "be excused from holding prayers in this
convention for the future." The convention, however,

2«See post, 387; Illinois Slate Register, July 22.

xxviii ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

by an overwhelming vote adopted a motion to table
Akin's resolution. A long debate followed: the resolu-
tion was renewed, but John M. Palmer, a pro-war
Democrat, moved a substitute declaring the principles
of freedom of worship and freedom of speech and dis-
claiming "all censorship over the pulpit, or the opinions
expressed therefrom, inasmuch as such censorship is in
violation of the rights of the Rev. gentleman."" The
resolution virtually sustaining Mr. Hale was barely
tabled (60-54), but the general declaration in favor of
the principles involved was upheld (9-102). The
convention then adjourned in order to proceed to
Jacksonville to participate in the ceremonies attendant
upon the funeral of Colonel Hardin, the Illinois war
hero, in whose memory the delegates were, according
to unanimous agreement, wearing crepe arm bands for
a period of thirty days.

When Mr. Hale next appeared before the convention
to offer prayer he was "grossly insulted and menaced
with bodily injury by a member of the convention."
On July 2,0, therefore, it was agreed that "whereas, it
is alike due to the Convention and the ministers that
we should not invite them to perform that duty unless
we could secure them against such indignities," the
custom of opening prayers should be discontinued, not
"from any dissatisfaction with the manner in which
they [the clergymen] have discharged their sacred duty,
but solely from an unwillingness to subject them to a
repetition of such indignities."

On July 11, Hale's assailant was given a further
rebuke in a debate over a resolution concerning the

'" Journal of the Convention, i68.

INTRODUCTION xxix

election of a chaplain, which was defeated because it
might have been interpreted as the result of a desire
"to get rid of our chaplains and to procure others. "^^
On July 26 the resolution of July 20 was rescinded and
the president was requested to provide for the opening
of the morning session with prayer.

By the middle of August the Whigs, with Demo-
cratic assistance, had carried every point upon which
they had cared to make a stand. Democratic critics
of orthodox stripe were completely disgusted. The
correspondent of the Chicago Democrat suggested that
the convention ought to be turned out "a la Cromwell:"
"The truth is, the convention is too horribly conserva-
tive to be of much use. Liberal principles stand no
chance whatever. . . . True Republicanism is daily
spurned and trampled under foot."-' There was also
fear that the plan of apportionment for the senate
endangered Democratic control of that body, if it did
not actually turn it over to the Whigs.'"

After the convention had finished its work, zealous
Democratic champions became more and more con-
vinced that the new constitution was "a mongrel
affair" likely to "make trouble."" Inasmuch, how-
ever, as 131 out of 138 members of the convention had
given a final endorsement to the new constitution, few
were willing to come out into a position of open hostil-
ity. Whigs meantime proclaimed the document as
worthy of support because it was not a party constitu-

^See post, 487.

""Buena Vista" on August ii, in Chicago Democrat, August 24. See also
"Beuna Vista" on August 6, in ibid., August 17; Shawneetown Democrat in ibid.,
August 24.

^Chicago Democrat, January 4, 1848.

^'Mark Skinner to Governor A. C. French, February 29, 1848, French papers;
see also Koerner, Memoirs, 1 : 523-524.

XXX ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

tion. Everyone agreed that many of its provisions
were a decided improvement upon the old constitution,
and this made it risky to reject a document wrought
at so much expense to the state. To the average voter
the strict regard for economy displayed by the conven-
tion was an important factor in attracting his support.'^
In the ratification election on March 6, 1848, the
constitution was adopted by a vote of 60,585 to 15,903.
The separate negro immigration clause was ratified,
50,261 to 21,297. The convention, confronting the
huge indebtedness which spelled virtual bankruptcy for
the state, had decided not only to practice economy
but also to stabilize public credit. A two mill tax was
therefore agreed upon with provision for separate
ratification. For this feature there was little enthus-
iasm although it was adopted, 41,349 to 30,945. Thus
with a narrow gauge economy was linked a device which
later aided materially in the financial rehabilitation of
Illinois.

'^Bel/evilk Advocate, January 20, 1848; §iiincy JVhig, February 2, 1848.

INTRODUCTION xxix

election of a chaplain, which was defeated because it
might have been interpreted as the result of a desire
"to get rid of our chaplains and to procure others. "=^
On July 26 the resolution of July 20 was rescinded and
the president was requested to provide for the opening
of the morning session with prayer.

By the middle of August the Whigs, with Demo-
cratic assistance, had carried every point upon which
they had cared to make a stand. Democratic critics
of orthodox stripe were completely disgusted. The
correspondent of the Chicago Democrat suggested that
the convention ought to be turned out "a la Cromwell:"
"The truth is, the convention is too horribly conserva-
tive to be of much use. Liberal principles stand no
chance whatever. . . . True Republicanism is daily
spurned and trampled under foot."29 There was also
fear that the plan of apportionment for the senate
endangered Democratic control of that body, if it did
not actually turn it over to the Whigs.^"

^Seepoi/, 487.

^'"Buena Vista" on August ii, in Chicago Democrat, August 24. See also
"Beuna Vista" on August 6, in ibid., August 17; Shawneetown Democrat in ibid.,
August 24.

^"Chicago Democrat, Jajiuary 4, 1848.

^'Mark Skinner to Governor A. C. French, February 29, 1848, French papers;
see also Koerner, Memoirs, i : 523-524.

XXX ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

''^Belleville Advocate, January 20, 1848; putney Whig, February 2, 1848.

I. MONDAY, JUNE 7, 1847

In pursuance of the provisions of the act of the General
Assembly, approved Feb. 20, 1847, entitled "An act to provide
for the call of a Convention," the delegates to said Convention,
chosen under said act, assembled this day in the hall of the House
of Representatives, in the state house at Springfield, at 3 o'clock,
p. M.

Mr. SHERMAN called the Convention to order,i and moved
that Zadoc Casey be appointed President pro tern.; which motion
was unanimously adopted.

On motion of Mr. SCATES, Louis M. Booth was appointed
Secretary pro tern., and J. A. Wilson, doorkeeper pro tern.

On motion of Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. Cline was appointed
assistant door-keeper pro tern.

Mr. THOMPSON moved that the names of the members be
called.

Mr. SCATES suggested the propriety of having a magistrate
to adminster the oath to the members.

The CHAIR suggested that no oath was necessary; and he
further suggested that, as the Secretary called the members by
counties, they present their credentials.

On motion of Mr. DEMENT, Mr. Moore of Gallatin county
was appointed Assistant Secretary pro tern.

The Secretary then called over the list of delegates, who, as their
names were called, presented their certificates of election; after
which they were again called, alphabetically, and the Chair
announced that there were one hundred and fifty-four delegates
in attendance.

Mr. SCATES offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That each delegate of this Convention, before pro-
ceeding to the transaction of any business, take an oath to support
the Constitution of the United States.

' Biographical sketches of the members and officers of the constitutional
convention will be found in the biographical appendix.

2 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

In offering the above, Mr. S. said, he was aware that the
powers of this Convention are elementary, and that the members
were not under any obligation to take an oath; yet, while there
was no form of an oath prescribed for the members, he hoped they
would take this one. — There was ao apparent propriety in the
oath, as no form of government they could adopt would be valid
unless it corresponded with the constitution of the United States.
Mr. THOMAS was not satisfied with the oath proposed to the
Convention by the gentleman from Jefferson. Where was the
necessity for any oath? This Convention represented the sover-
eignty of the state of Illinois. Its members were not responsible
to any power for the violation of the oath, if taken. No punish-
ment could be awarded for a breach of it. He would remind the
gentleman that there were constitutions adopted in other states
before the United States had a constitution, and, therefore,
he could see no obligation to swear to support the constitution
of the United States. This was his present view, but if the
gentleman could satisfy him that it was proper, he would vote
for it.

Mr. MINSHALL said that there would seem a manifest pro-
priety in taking an oath which, although it might be said, would
impose no additional obligation, still could work no injury.
Further, that as no form of government could be established by
this Convention that would differ in character from that of the
constitution of the United States, it appeared to him quite proper,
though perhaps not necessary, to take an oath to support the
constitution of the United States. He, however, would move,
as an amendment to the resolution, the following, to be added
thereto: "and to faithfully discharge the duties of their office
as delegates of this Convention, for the purpose of revising and
amending the constitution of the state of Illinois."

The amendment having been agreed to, the question was put
on the resolution, as amended, and decided in the affirmative.

Mr. DAWSON moved that William Lavely, esq., be called
within the bar to administer the oath.

Mr. LOGAN said, that for the purpose of economizing time,
he hoped that the oath would be administered to the body collec-
tively; which mode would save considerable time, and could be

MONDAY, JUNE 7, 1847 3

performed by the members without leaving their seats, simply by
raising the hand. He made a motion to that effect.

Mr. SCATES hoped the oath would be administered, if done
at all, in a more dignified manner than that suggested by the
member from Sangamon. The plan suggested might save a few
moments' time, but would not comport with the proper dignity
which should accompany the administration of an oath. It
reminded him of the manner in which the oath of allegiance was
administered by the conquerers of New Mexico.

Mr. LOGAN then moved a division of the question; which
was lost.

The members then were called to the desk by the Secretary,
ten at a time, and the oath, as adopted, was administered to them
by Wm. Lavely, esq.

Mr. SERVANT moved that the Convention adjourn. Nega-
tived— yeas (,2, nays 92.

Mr. BOND offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That we will now proceed to organize this Con-
vention, by electing a President, one Secretary, and one
Sergeant-at-arms, and that no other officers shall be consti-
tuted or appointed until it becomes necessary, in the opinion
of the President and principal Secretary, to employ some
competent person to assist the Secretary in the discharge
of his duties; when the Secretary may employ a competent
assistant, to whom shall be paid the sum of two dollars per
day, while necessarily employed; Provided, the Sergeant-at-arms
may, in his discretion, employ some able-bodied person to assist
him in discharging his duties, to whom there shall be paid a sum
of one dollar per day, for each day necessarily employed; and he
may employ two active, orderly, and competent boys as messengers,
&c., who shall each be paid the sum of fifty cents per day for the
time employed.

In offering this resolution, he had but a few words to say. He
intended no speech in support of it. If not all, many of us came
here for purposes of economy, retrenchment, and reform. This
proposition at this season can carry out that purpose. We can
at this season of the year dispense with many officers; for after the
Convention is organized, the Secretary alone can perform all the

4 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

duties of the office. We need, at least I think, but one Secretary;
there is no necessity for an assistant. The resolution, however,
provides for the employment of pne when his services are required.
— There is not the mass of business, nor the great amount of
copying to be done, as is the case at a meeting of the Legislature.
The Sergeant-at-arms, when he required assistance, was em-
powered to employ it, at two dollars per day. The resolution he
understood would meet with entire approbation. The boys pro-
vided for by the resolution can easily be procured here, at the rate
fixed — fifty cents a day.

The resolution, upon a division, was adopted. Under it, the
Chair announced the next business to be the election of a President
of the Convention, and suggested that the mode of electing him
was as the Convention would direct.

Mr. WILLIAMS reminded the Chair that the act of the
Legislature providing for a call of a Convention, directed that he
should be chosen by ballot. We might, it is true, repeal the direc-
tion, but until it was repealed, he considered that we should con-
form to it. He moved that they proceed to elect by ballot.

The reading of the law was called for, and the Secretary read
the 5th section of the act providing for a call of the Convention.
The motion was then put and carried.

The Chair appointed Messrs. Logan, Scates, and Dunlap, .
tellers; and they, having received the ballots of the members, and
counted them, reported as follows:

For Newton Cloud, 84; Zadoc Casey, 65; Archibald
Williams, a; Cyrus Edwards, 2.

Whereupon, the Chair announced that Newton Cloud, esq.,
had been elected President of the Convention, and requested
Messrs. Thompson and Hay to conduct him to the chair.

Upon taking the chair, the President said —

Gentlemen of the Convention: It is but proper, on entering
upon the duty assigned me by the choice just made, that I should
return you my'most sincere thanks for the honor you have con-
ferred.

I enter~upon the discharge of the duties of President of this
Convention|with^much*embarrassment, for I feel that I have a
difficult and important duty assigned me.

MONDAY, JUNE 7, 1847 5

I can only promise that my best efforts shall be made to dis-
charge that duty faithfully and impartially, and that all the little
ability that I possess shall be devoted to the despatch and further-
ance of the public business. I will not allude, however remotely,
to the great objects upon which we have been called to act, but
will conclude by returning you again my sincere thanks for the
honor you have conferred on me.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to proceed to the election of a
Secretary by acclamation.

Mr. THOMAS. We are not all in favor of the same man.
I object.

Mr. DAVIS. I, then, move to vote for Secretary viva voce;
which motion was adopted.

Mr. WILLIAMS nominated Mr. Burt of Quincy.

Mr. BALLINGALL nominated H. W. Moore of Gallatin and
the Convention proceeded to vote for Secretary.

Mr. MooRE received 91 votes; Mr. Burt, 59; scattering, i;
and Mr. Moore was declared elected.

Mr. ALLEN nominated, for Sergeant-at-arms, Mr. J. A.
Wilson.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved that Mr. Wilson be elected by
acclamation, and, after some debate, withdrew the motion.

The Convention divided on the nomination, and Mr. Wilson
was declared elected, he receiving 99 votes.

Mr. THOMAS moved the Convention adjourn. Lost — yeas
53, nays not counted.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved that the Convention
proceed to the election of a printer.

Mr. LOGAN moved to lay this motion on the table, to enable
him to offer a resolution in relation to the selection of a printer;
which motion was carried.

Mr. LOGAN then offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That the printing of this Convention shall be let to
the lowest responsible and capable bidder.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon offered, as a substitute: "That
a committee of five be appointed by the President to receive
proposals for the printing of the proceedings of the Convention,

6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

and that they be directed to contract with the lowest responsible
bidder, and report at as early a day as practicable.

Mr. SHERMAN asked, are we not getting along a little too
fast with this resolution? The law provides that we shall elect
a printer, and that law fixes the price to be paid, with which the
Convention has nothing to do.

Mr. LOGAN said that, waiving for the present a discussion of
the right of the Legislature to limit this Convention, look at the
proposition in another way. Can we not receive the bids of all
persons who may desire to perform this work, with the rates, &c.,
compare them with the rates allowed the public printer, and then
can we not elect that one who will do it the cheapest?

Mr. DEMENT rose, not for the purpose, particularly, of
opposing the resolution, but to inquire of some of the members of
the last Assembly how far the words, "shall receive the same com-
pensation as is allowed by the present Assembly," have effect
upon this resolution. He did not intend to argue whether we have
the power to go beyond the law, but how far, inasmuch as we had
obeyed the restriction of the law in one case, the election of
President by ballot, we should still go with that law. As soon as
we had chosen the President by the mode prescribed in this law, we
then, when the law requires no form of election, dispose of the
others in the most summary manner. This was conceded by
gentlemen for the purpose of conforming to the act of the Legis-
lature; and he apprehended that the resolution now offered did
come in conflict with those words of the act in relation to the
printer, where it says "he shall receive the same compensation as
the same officer receives from the present General Assembly."
He moved to lay the resolution on the table, but withdrew it, at the
request of

Mr. SCATES, who said that the act of the Legislature provided
a compensation to be allowed for printing for the Convention.

The resolution stating what should be the officers of this Con-
vention had been passed without debate; and he disliked to see
resolutions spread on the record appropriating money without
authority. Where have you the power to do so? He doubted
very much if the members of the Convention could get paid for
their services unless the Legislature had provided and appropriated

MONDAY, JUNE 7, 1847 7

the means for that purpose. The constitution of the state ex-
pressly states how and by whom money shall be appropriated.
The Legislature has fixed our pay; we can take less, but no
more. The Legislature has provided a printer for us, and fixed his
compensation, and states that he shall be elected by the Convention.
The resolution now before us confers the power upon five members
of this body to give the printing. We may receive the services of
the printer, under that contract, but can we, appropriate the money
to pay for it? He disliked to do things where the power to act
was of a doubtful character. He would like the resolution already
passed, changing the pay of the door-keepers, rescinded, and the
present one laid on the table. He moved to lay the resolution
on the table.

Mr. LOGAN demanded the yeas and nays; which were ordered
and taken, and the resolution was laid on the table — yeas 82,
nays 70.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess renewed his motion to proceed
to the election of a printer.

Mr. WILLIAMS stated that one reason why the resolution of
Mr. Logan had been laid on the table, was to enable members to
reflect on the matter. He was for economy; and if there was any
person willing to do the work cheaper than another, he desired to
give it to him. He moved to lay Mr. C.'s motion on the table;
which was carried.

Mr. EDWARDS moved that a committee of five be appointed
to prepare and report rules and regulations for the government of
this Convention. Agreed to.

A motion to adopt, for the present government of the Conven-
tion, the rules of the last House of Representatives, was laid on
the table.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison offered the following resolution;
which was adopted:

Resolved, That the Secretary be directed to call upon the
clergy of the different denominations in the city, and to solicit
an arrangement among them for opening every morning, by prayer,
the meetings of the Convention.

Mr. BALLINGALL offered the following resolution; which
was adopted:

8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Resohedy That the Secretary prepare ballots, properly num-
bered, for seats for the members of the Convention, and that the
members proceed thereafter to draw the ballots for their respective
seats.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin offered the following resolution;
which was adopted:

Resolved, That the editors and reporters of the newspapers
published in this state be allowed seats within the bar of this hall.

On motion, the Convention adjourned till to-morrow, at lo
o'clock, A. M.

II. TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1847

After an appropriate prayer by the Rev. Mr. Barger^ of
Springfield, the Convention resumed its deliberations.

Pursuant to the resolution adopted yesterday, the members
proceeded to draw the ballots for their respective seats in the hall.

Mr. BROCKMAN offered the following resolution; which was
adopted:

Resolved, That for the comfort and convenience of the members
of this Convention, the Sergeant-at-arms be instructed to have
removed the railings from the hall, and to place the seats of
members further back towards the corner of the hall.

Mr. WEAD offered the following:

Ordered, That so much of the resolution of the member from
Clinton, offered yesterday, as provides for limiting the number
and pay of officers of this Convention, be rescinded.

In offering this resolution, Mr. W. said, that he was of the
opinion that the resolution which it proposed to rescind in part,
had been introduced and passed yesterday without the members
having had time for consultation, and without their being apprised
of its effect. That resolution, if he understood it properly,
limited the number of officers of the Convention, and fixed their
salaries at a price below the rate provided for in the act of the
Legislature. True, it allowed the employment of an assistant
Secretary and an assistant Sergeant-at-arms. — He thought it most
imprudent thus to limit, by resolution, the officers of the Con-
vention, when that Convention were the proper judges of what
officers they required. The Convention would require the
services of two Sergeants-at-arms; one cannot do all the work, for
his services would always be required within the hall, while
another would be required to go elsewhere, and perform duties
beyond the hall. I object to our granting the Secretary power to

' Probably John S. Bargar, pastor of First Methodist Episcopal Church of
Springfield. Inter-State Publishing Company, History of Sangamon County,
600.

lo ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

name a deputy when he shall deem it necessary. That right
belongs to this Convention only. The saving proposed by this
resolution is but a small matter; the people of the state of Illinois
do not require such economy — the cutting down of the salaries of
two small officers. Our object is other than a legislative one; it
is to revise the constitution of the state of Illinois, and not to fix
the compensation of her officers. We may place in the constitu-
tion that the Secretary and Sergeant-at-arms, hereafter to be
appointed, shall not receive beyond the sums provided in the
resolution, but can we, by a mere resolution, enact a law? — But
the resolution does not intend that it shall be incorporated into
the constitution we came here to revise and adopt; and is it any
part of our duty to meddle with the pay they shall receive?

The Legislature might pay them, or fix the sum that they
should receive at what amount it pleased; it might appropriate
them nothing if it pleased, for it was a matter entirely with that
body.

It had been said that this provision might be placed in the
constitution, but how? This resolution contemplates no such
thing; it has reference merely to the officers whom we shall employ,
and for the payment of whose services the Legislature has already
made an appropriation. By what reason, right, or justice, then,
can we fix the amount of their pay?

Is it economy for members — or do they think that the people
require such economy — to reduce the pay of officers who will have
to labor the whole day in the faithful discharge of their duties to
earn one dollar per day, when we take four for ourselves. The
saving contemplated would reduce the taxes but little; it is a
matter the people are not looking at. I hope the Convention will
not rise until it has reduced the expenses of from over |2oo,ooo
per annum to something less than one hundred thousand dollars.
Let them but pursue a course to effect that object, and not com-
mence on this matter. Let them reduce the tax below sixty-five
per cent, on personal property; let them reduce the county taxes,
of which but little is used for county purposes, and let these small
officers alone.

He considered that the resolution had been passed without
being understood by the members of the Convention, and he

TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1847 11

regretted it; for he considered that it frequently took longer to
undo a wrong action than to defeat or avoid it in the first
instance.

Mr. BOND said that he had offered the resolution, and it
was only because it had been offered by him that he rose to say a
few words in reply to what had fallen from the member from
Fulton. That it had not been discussed was very true, but he
did not think that there was any discussion necessary upon it; it
bore on its face — in the very words of it was expressed the great
objects of its introduction — retrenchment and reform.

We have come here for the purpose of retrenching and re-
forming the expenses of our government, and he did not think of
coming here to carry out one thing and do, in fact, another. He
thought straws showed which way the wind blew. He was for
economy in all proceedings of the Convention, and would show
his sincerity if the gentleman would introduce any proposition to
reduce the pay of members, he would vote for it. The resolution
had not been intruded upon the Convention: it had been offered
in good faith, and he believed it ought to meet the approbation of
the Convention. He asked, who, when the constitution under
which we now live had been adopted in the first instance, had
fixed the pay of members? The Legislature telling this Conven-
tion what to do, is like the preacher telling God what is right.

He was confident the resolution was not understood: it did
not interfere with the pay of the Secretary or Sergeant-at-arms —
they still receive the pay allowed them by the Legislature; but it
only prescribes what shall be paid to their assistants, whom they
are authorized to employ when their services are required. He
had experience in the duties of Secretary of legislative bodies, and
he was convinced that one person could perform all the duties of
that office for this Convention. There was not that mass of
copying, nor that interminable labor to be performed as in the
Legislature. Also, one Sergeant-at-arms could perform the work
of that office; but if not, the resolution allowed him to employ an
assistant, at one dollar per day — and plenty could be procured
to do the work at that rate; even here they could be procured, as
well as by searching from the southern border to the most northern
counties for men, who were to be brought here to fill these offices

12 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

especially reserved for them. No fires were to [be] built; various other
duties usually performed by the Sergeant-at-arms could be dis-
pensed with. Nor would that officer have to go round looking
up the members of the Convention, as was often the case in the
Legislature. He hoped the gentleman from Fulton would aid in
reforming the constitutional expenses of the government. Let
him come forward with his proposition to lower the salaries of all,
and he (Mr. B.) would vote as low as the gentleman from Fulton
dare.

He would like to reply to some of the logic of the gentleman
from Jefferson (Mr. Scates,) if he really knew what kind of logic
it was that he had used yesterday. He (Mr. B.) had read none,
and he was disposed to inquire of Mr. S. what kind he had read.
He had understood the gentleman from Jefferson to say that we
could reduce the pay of the members, but not of the officers of the
Convention.

Mr. SCATES. I did not say that we could reduce the pay
of the members; the gentleman did not understand me.

Mr. BOND resumed, by stating that he had misunderstood
the gentleman. He had occupied more time than he had intended
when he commenced. The resolution was intended only to govern
the present officers of the Convention; and a more proper time
would arrive for the discussion. A committee had been appointed
to prepare and report rules and regulations for the Convention,
and they will no doubt report what officers are necessary. When
they did so, then would be the proper time for the discussion of this
question.

Mr. MINSHALL asked, if the resolution to rescind was in
order. Would not the proper way be to move to reconsider?

The CHAIR ruled that the resolution to rescind was in order.

Mr. WEAD said, that it had been insinuated in the remarks of
the gentleman that he had argued that this resolution had been
intruded upon the Convention. He had said no such thing; nor
would any language used by him justify such a construction. He
had said, however, that it had been passed without the members
having had time for reflection. He could not see any reason why
the Convention should not rescind the resolution of yesterday.
We had been sent here for the purpose of retrenchment and reform

TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1847 13

of the evils of the old constitution. Was one of the evils of that
constitution an allowance of four dollars to our Sergeant-at-arms?
We save, by this resolution, four dollars a day in the pay of
Secretary and Sergeant-at-arms. Did the people require this of
us, he would vote for it; but he was satisfied that they were willing
that we should allow them liberally for their services. Mr. W.
was as willing as Mr. B. to reduce the county expenses by every
means in their power, from over $650,000 to less than $300,000.

He was not familiar with the duties of Secretary, but judging
from the vast amount of business yesterday, he considered that
it was impossible for one to do it alone. Gentlemen should
remember that this is the largest body ever convened in Illinois,
and that more officers were required than in any other that has
met before.— He considered the doctrine, that we had a right to
fix the pay of members or officers otherwise than as directed by
the act of the Legislature, as perfectly preposterous. That we
had the right to regulate future officers' salary, by engrafting a
direction in the constitution, was perfectly right, but to regulate
their pay by a simple resolution of the Convention was out of the
question.

Mr. BOND read a portion of Mr. Scates' remarks, of yester-
day, as reported in the Register, as going to establish that he was
not alone in his understanding of Mr. S.'s remarks; to which

Mr. SCATES briefly replied.

Mr. LOGAN said there was nothing in the question itself, as
to what pay should be allowed the Secretary and Sergeant-at-arms
that was worthy of the consumption of the time of the Convention;
but there was the same principle in it which affected a large class
of other questions of more importance, and which should be settled.

Gentlemen, he had observed, in his experience, were never able
to find the starting point where retrenchment should commence.
All economy, he always found, was commenced in small matters.
You may look around in vain for a large one; whenever you raise
your arm to strike, why the answer comes, "that is a small matter,
let it alone." We must make one strong blow. Now is the time.
The subject is not, it is true, a large one, but we must commence.
I am in favor of commencing now, because of the peculiar circum-
stances in which the people of Illinois are situated. I am in favor

14 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of meeting that situation and carrying the work of retrenchment
throughout all its ramifications. Our state is loaded with a heavy
debt, under which the people and their property are groaning.
The people call on us to save, in the expenses of their government,
not hundreds, but thousands. Speak not to them of liberality
till our state is in different circumstances. Liberality ceases to
be a virtue when it postpones justice! Whenever we are obliged
to lay a tax upon the country too heavy for the proper support of
the government of that country, I am for striking at the root of
all unnecessary salaries — reducing them. An enormous debt is
overhanging us. We are taxed to the full measure which the
people can endure. We must pay the large debt we owe, and
which is fast becoming a burden not only upon us, but will be on
those who shall follow us. Our creditors are demanding payment
of our debts; can we talk of liberality? Liberality is incompatible
with the present situation of the country. Were the whole people
gathered here, they would have no right to give salaries beyond
what is strictly necessary. I am for saving every dollar that can
be saved. It is necessary that proper officers should be chosen
and paid to perform the functions of government; and I am willing
to pay in every department only just sufficient to procure the
services of such men. It is not proposed to reduce the pay of the
principal secretary, and he is allowed to employ an assistant when
his services are necessary. One will be sufficient, another would
be supernumary [sic]. At the commencement there was of course
a greater press of business — of resolutions; that is all over. Here-
after we will have committees to prepare the business. Discus-
sions upon the great questions will commence and occupy the
greater part of the time. The question of a bank will come up
and be discussed; there will be no bills, no petitions, no local
legislation. We will have but little use of the Secretary, and less
of his assistant. The resolution contemplates the employment
of an able-bodied assistant and two boys — what do you want with
more of them? Two boys can receive the propositions of 162
members as fast as they can be presented. We should give
salaries only sufficient to procure the services. Can we procure
them at the prices contained, in the resolution? My word for it
you can. I want this to be a precedent for everything else.

TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1847 15

There is a section in the constitution of Vermont, which sets forth
that every man should have some profession and mode of life,
and should do everything in his power to aid the government;
that when his assistance to the government works injury to him
in his business, he should be remunerated; but when the salaries
of officers are used as a source of profit, that then they should be
cut down and reduced. If this is a correct principle it should
govern us. Are not these offices sought for profit? — The very
fact of the applicants seeking and desiring them proves it, not to
speak of their electioneering. I could scarcely get along the street
with the constant applications, and I cannot comprehend how
my democratic friends survive it at all. If we can get persons to
do the work, that is evidence that the prices are high enough. If
we cannot, why then we can raise them.

My constituents desire the most rigid economy in all things,
which will enable them to pay off their just debts. I am not for
stopping here, but for continuing it for all time to come, or until
we are relieved from debt. — Now is the time. Let us begin and
apply the principle to ourselves and our officers; let it operate
now. — There is no use in procrastinating. We have been insolvent
long enough; we have delayed payment of our just debts long
enough. Apply all you can save to the liquidation of the state
debt.

The next question was the power of this Convention. An
oath to support the constitution of the United States had been
proposed and taken, because we can do nothing in contravention
of that instrument, and because there was no other power to limit
us. Where is the limitation of the power of this Convention over
the treasury? Point it out.

Mr. WEAD explained.

Mr. LOGAN resumed. It was said yesterday that we could
draw no money from the treasury because the constitution pointed
out the manner in which it should be done. I differ in opinion on
this matter. We have the power to prescribe the powers and
duties and salaries of all officers. Can we not fix in the constitu-
tion that money shall be paid from the treasury only on general
principles? The Legislature has appropriated the money to pay
us and our officers; to be paid on the certificate of the President.

1 6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Can we not say that our officers shall not draw the money? Can
we not, by resolution, control the certificate of the President?
Have we no power, except what is expressed in the act? Does
that give us the power to make rules and regulations for our
government? It does not, yet we have appointed a committee
to report such rules, and we will adopt them.

This resolution is right in itself. It advertises the men em-
ployed what they shall receive. If we are sincere in our professions
of economy, don't let us differ as to the mode, the how, or where,
but let us preserve the principle, and carry it out at all times.
Let the gentleman who proposes to rescind propose his plan to
economize, and I shall not be found wanting. Is there anything
said in the act that we shall not amend the constitution by a
resolution? Not a word. There are many things to be done in
this constitution which are but temporary provisions. In our
present constitution, the judges of the supreme court were to
receive $i,ooo a year, for a certain time, payable quarterly. The
Convention that formed that constitution made this appropria-
tion, and no Legislature could repeal it. We may district the state
for the next Legislature, and make many other alterations of a
temporary character. I don't care for the form — for the mere
saving of a few dollars; but I contend for it as a principle, and
intend it as a precedent. But when the state is in debt, and
there are, in those countries now visited by famine, many widows
and orphans who hold our bonds, and are undergoing the utmost
privations because the interest of our debt is not paid, I say
again, this is not time for liberality.

Mr. BALLINGALL moved that the Convention adjourn till
the afternoon, at 3 o'clock. Carried.

AFTERNOON

Mr. HARVEY moved to strike out all after the word
"resolved," in the motion of Mr. Wead, and insert "that the
members and officers of this Convention shall receive the sum of
I2.50 per day, each."

Mr. PALMER of Marshall moved to amend the proposed
amendment, by striking out the words "and fifty cents."

Mr. DEMENT rose to offer an amendment: but the Chair

TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1847 17

ruled it out of order, there being an amendment to an amendment
pending. He then stated that he did not believe, nor did he
think any other member believed, that any resolution of this
body could prevent the members, or such of them as would
demand it, from receiving the sum of four dollars per day — as
fixed by the Legislature. He denied the position assumed by the
gentleman from Sangamon (Mr. Logan,) that the acts of this
Convention would be paramount to any law of the land, until it
had been approved and ratified by the people in the manner pre-
scribed by the law. In case, asked Mr. D., we did make an
enactment, where would be its power or its force, or its binding
obligation on any one, if the constitution we shall adopt is rejected
by the people? It appeared to him that the powers of this
Convention had been narrowed down to a mere power to propose
amendments, or a substitute for the present constitution of the
state; and what we may do may pass as a dead letter from our
hands, and be received with the contempt of the whole people.

He had heard much talk about economy; and the gentlemen
who had made speeches on that subject might have spoken in all
sincerity, or it might be to add to their already well established
reputations for eloquence and speech-making.

He was of opinion that the Convention could appropriate no
money, unless the clause making the appropriation is made a
component part of the constitution; nor could the money thus
appropriated be drawn from the treasury until the constitution
containing the appropriation had been approved and ratified by
the people. It was proposed by this resolution to pay the Secre-
tary four dollars per day, under the law, and the assistant but
two dollars.

He was satisfied that we could not alter the salaries of our
officers from the sum fixed by the Legislature, without making
that resolution, or proposition containing this alteration, a com-
ponent part of the constitution, and submitting it to the people
for their ratification. Our mere enactment has no force whatever.
— Our constitution, if we can dignify it by such a name, will not
be obligatory, in the least, on any one here or in the state, until it
shall have been approved by the people. And he begged members
not to encumber that instrument, which they had convened here

1 8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

to frame, with these small and trifling sections, all of which would
endanger the adoption of the constitution. He said, that upon
all of the great and important subjects which would engage the
deliberations of that body, they were familiar with the feelings,
sentiments, and opinions of their constituents, and were ready
and prepared to vote upon them; but upon these little questions,
which had never been the subject of thought among the people,
the members of the Convention could not say what were the
sentiments of their constituents; and by voting for their incorpora-
tion with the constitution, they endangered its adoption. Had
we not, then, better go home and leave these light and trivial
matters for future legislation, and not have these appendages,
upon which we know nothing of the sentiment of the people?

Mr. D. then read, as a part of his speech, the proposed amend-
ment that had been ruled out of order; it was to the effect that the
members should contribute a portion of their pay, for the purpose
of employing and paying the Secretary and Sergeant-at-arms at
the rate of four dollars per day. He said there were one hundred
and sixty-two members present, who were drawing four dollars
per day, and employed in a discussion upon the question whether
our door-keeper shall receive two or four dollars a day, while that
very discussion was a tax of two hundred dollars an hour upon
the state. The gentlemen, in their zeal for economy, strike at the
pay of these petty officers, who have no interest or responsibility
other than to perform their duty and receive their pay; yet it
was said that the mere reduction of their pay was to accomplish
wonders — relieve the state from all debt, feed the starving suffer-
ers in Ireland, and many other like brilliant acts.

Now, he would remind them that, by dispensing with half an
hour's debate upon this question, enough would be saved to pay
the whole additional expense. The speeches of the gentlemen —
and he would not be understood as meaning to say they were not
well worth the money — would, then, if dispensed with, pay the
whole expenses.

He then proposed that the members should come forward and
voluntarily surrender a respective share of their own pay, and
give it to the door-keeper. But in case they were to have speeches
he was willing to stake their own pay on the fact whether our

TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1847 19

actions meet the approval of the people; and was willing, if th
people do not accept the work of this Convention, and return the
constitution on our hands, that we take it, and not receive any
other payment for our services.

This would show our sincerity in speaking so much of economy.
He hoped, therefore, that they would elect these officers, and a
printer, and complete the organization of the Convention, and
proceed with the business. Speech-making cost |ioo every thirty
minutes; let us organize without further debate, and for the future
economize both time and money.

Mr. HAYES moved the previous question.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess asked if the previous question
was in order? We had adopted no rules.

The CHAIR said it was in order.

Mr. WILLIAMS rose to debate the propriety of taking the
previous question.

Mr. BALLINGALL called to order; and a discussion ensued
as to Mr. Williams* right to proceed.

The CHAIR decided in his favor.

Mr. W. said, that he thought, when he came here today, we
were ready to proceed with the business; that we were sufficiently
organized to have started other important questions. But there
were important questions involved in the present one, which he
thought should be discussed now and at once. They would have
to be settled at some time.

Messrs. Palmer of Macoupin, Thomas, Loudon, and Logan
continued the discussion on the propriety of taking the main
question, a more detailed report of whose remarks we regret our
inability, from want of room, to give in our present number.

Mr. HAYES then withdrew his call.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond promised, as he desired to present a few
remarks, to do as others had done — to speak of everything else
save the resolution before them. He did not think the Convention
had the power or right to appropriate money from the treasury.
The present constitution of the state, which was the supreme law
of the land, gives the Legislature the power to call a Convention,
and under that constitutional power this Convention had been

20 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

called.' He apprehended that if the Convention had the power to
appropriate money in one case, they had the same power to do so
in all. The constitution directs the manner in which money shall
be appropriated; that constitution, and every law under it, is yet
in full force. Suppose we make an appropriation and attach it to
the constitution we shall frame, and that constitution is rejected
by the people, what becomes of the appropriation? He under-
stood the Legislature had power to call a Convention, and they
had done so, and made provisions for its comfort and convenience
by law. — The constitution says, "no money shall be appropriated
out of the treasury except by law." Can we ascend higher than
the constitution? If we can, I ask for the book, for the law
and the precedent. I come here to effect the election of judges
by the people, limiting the sessions of the Legislature to once in
four years, and then for sixty days only, and for settling their
per diem. I can't say we will do so, nor that the people will
ratify what we really will propose to them. He asked again
where was the authority for this Convention to make laws, or
what act of theirs would be binding unless ratified by the people?
When we formed our present constitution we were a territory,
and the instances of appropriation spoken of by the gentleman
from Sangamon were embodied in the constitution, and pre-
sumed an adoption thereof by the people.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall, after some preliminary remarks,
said he could not think any gentleman would deny the right of the
members, under the present embarrassed state of affairs, to take
but two dollars a day; and that our officers, who will be fully as
patriotic, will follow our example and give their services for the
same amount of compensation. He hoped the members would
reduce their own pay. They could not reduce the pay of their
officers, of the judges and all others, and then go home to their
constituents with four dollars a day in their pockets. He had
brought money with him to pay his board and all other expenses,
and was willing to take but the two dollars. He was old, but
hoped not to be laid in his grave till all our debts had been paid.

Mr. P. followed the question at some length, but we not having
room, must close our report of his speech for the present.

' See correction made by Davis in his speech on Monday, June 14, pp. 75-76.

TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1847 21

The previous question was again moved, but withdrawn at
the request of

Mr. SCATES, who moved to lay the whole matter on the table,
to enable the committee on Rules to report; which was agreed to.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison, from the committee for that
purpose, reported a series of rules and regulations for the govern-
ment of the Convention; which were read and adopted.

Mr. SERVANT moved that 300 copies of the rules just
adopted be printed.

Mr. SCATES advocated a smaller number, but suggested that
we had not yet chosen a printer, and therefore moved to lay the
motion to print on the table. Carried — yeas 73, nays 62.

Mr. WILLIAMS, in order to give the President time to
appoint the committees moved that the Convention adjourn till
to-morrow, at 10 a. m. Carried — yeas 79, nays 61.

III. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Bergen.*

Messrs. Hurlbut and Choate, delegates to the Convention,
appeared this morning, presented their credentials, and were
qualified.

The Secretary then read the journal.

Mr. DEMENT moved to admit within the bar of the Conven-
tion the Governor of the State, Secretary of State, and Judges of
the United States and State Courts.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved to amend by adding
"and all ex-officers of the state."

Mr. KNOWLTON moved to add "and all officers and soldiers
just returned from the Mexican war."

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to add "and all members of
Congress."

Mr. WHITNEY moved to lay the resolution and amendments
on the table. Carried.

*Rev. John G. Bergen: born November 27, 1790, at Hightstown, Middle-
sex County, New Jersey; of Norwegian and Scotch descent; preliminary
education at academies in Cranberry and Baskin Ridge; 1807, graduated from
Princeton; March, 1810- — September, 1812, tutor in Princeton; December,
1812, ordained as Presbyterian minister; December, 1812 — September 10,
1828, pastor at Madison, New Jersey; September 22, 1828, left for Illinois,
sent by the Home Board of the American Missionary Association; November,
1828, arrived in Springfield; December, 1828^December, 1848, first regular
pastor of First Presbyterian Church of Springfield ; organized Second Presby-
terian Church of Springfield, and a number of additional churches; December,
1848, resigned as pastor, devoting himself to writing for the press over the
signature of "Old Man of the Prairies" and to missionary effort among feeble
churches; several times commissioner to the general assembly of the Presby-
terian church ; assisted in forming first presbytery and first synod in the state ;
first moderator of each, and first moderator of the tmited synod; for many
years a director of the Theological Seminary of the Northwest at Chicago;
1854, given degree of D. D. by Centre College, Danville, Kentucky; died
January 17, 1872.

Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois; History of
Sangamon County, 2: 862, 866; Power, History of the Early Settlers of Sanga-
mon County, 114-116; Inter-State Pubhshing Company, History of Sangamon
County, 515-519; Chapman Brothers, Portrait and Biographical Album o'
Sangamon County, 294, 778.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 23

Mr. SINGLETON offered a resolution stating the powers of
the Convention to be limited.

Mr. ARCHER offered the following amendment:

"Resolved, That this Convention has assembled for the purpose
of revising, altering, or amending the constitution of this state,
and that the powers and duties of said Convention are limited,
after its proper organization, to such objects only.

"Resolved, That, with a view of entering upon the discharge of
the duties assigned to said Convention, we now proceed to the
election of an assistant Secretary and assistant door-keeper and
printer, any resolution heretofore passed to the contrary notwith-
standing."

In offering the above, Mr. A. said, that he did so with a view
of presenting his opinions upon the matter that had occupied the
Convention for the past day or two. — In so doing he was very
anxious to pay all respect to the opinions and views of those with
whom he differed, and without reflecting in the least upon their
motives or views. He held true economy to consist, in some
measure, in the employment of the means sufficient to accomplish
the end.

The act of the Legislature has provided officers for this Con-
vention, to enable us to carry out the objects for which we have
convened. He thought another Secretary and Sergeant-at-arms
necessary; and if the Convention, from the want of either one of
these officers, were detained a single day beyond the time they
would otherwise have concluded their business, the expense
attendant on that delay would be far more than the additional
expense of these officers. He was of opinion that the powers
of the Convention were expressed correctly in his amendment to
the resolution of the gentleman from Brown. — The question of
economy in the pay of the officers of the Convention, or of the
members thereof, formed no subject in the canvass in the county
which he (Mr. A.) had the honor, in part, to represent. He con-
tended that the Convention had no legislative powers; that in
the way of economy he would go as far as any other in retrenching
the expenses of the state of Illinois. The original resolution sub-
mitted whether there should be a Convention, and the act calling
the Convention contemplated no such purpose as that we were to

24 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

have legislative powers; and none other than to alter and revise
the constitution. Mr. A. would go with any of them in putting
down to the lowest rates, that would command talent, the salaries
of all officers.

Mr. McCALLEN offered the following as an amendment to
the amendment: Strike out "printer," and insert, "that the
Secretary be instructed to receive sealed proposals at his desk,
until lo o'clock, a. m., to-n;orrow, for the printing for this Conven-
tion; and that the President proceed at that hour to open said
proposals, and award the printing to the lowest responsible bidder."

Mr. SCATES moved to lay the whole subject on the table.

Mr. CONSTABLE appealed to him to withdraw his motion.

Mr. SCATES declined.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess hoped that it would be with-
drawn, and that the vote by which the rules had been adopted
would be reconsidered.

The vote was then taken on laying the subject on the table,
and decided in the affirmative — yeas 72, nays 67.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond submitted some amendments to the rules;
to which

Mr. LOGAN offered an amendment.

Mr. PRATT offered an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. WEAD moved to lay the resolution and amendments on
the table; which was carried.

Mr. ROBBINS offered two resolutions in relation to the number
and selection of the standing and select committees, and advocated
their adoption.

Mr. DEMENT opposed the resolutions.

Mr. WEAD moved to lay them on the table, and print; after-
wards withdrew the motion to print, and the resolutions were laid
on the table.

Mr. ARMSTRONG offered a resolution in relation to addi-
tional committees to be appointed. Laid on the table.

Mr. DEMENT moved to take up the resolutions offered by
Mr. Singleton, and the amendment; and, after debate, they were
taken up.

Mr. BROCKMAN advocated the adoption of the amendment
of the gentleman from Pike to the resolution of the gentleman

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 25

from Brown. He denied that the Convention had any legislative
powers; nor any power save that expressly granted by the Legis-
lature. The Legislature had defined the pay for our officers, and
we had no power to change it. He was for retrenchment when-
ever that subject came properly before them. He hoped they
would immediately elect a secretary, a sergeant-at-arms, and a
printer, which officers were necessary. He advocated a full and
immediate organization of the Convention, and that it should at
once proceed to public business.

Mr. SINGLETON said, that he had offered the resolution in
order to bring before the Convention the true question — its
powers. He thought the power of a Convention was merely to
propose alterations and amendments to the constitution, and that
the people had the right and the power to make the changes.
We had no power to change the law, but we had the power to
propose the change, and the people to make the change. — It was
true that, to some extent, the people are here in their sovereign
capacity, but it was only to inquire whether they should change
their law. The Legislature is just as sovereign as this Convention.
This body is clearly bound by the act of the Legislature. The
people are represented in that body as much, if not more, in their
sovereign capacity as in this. The people never intended these
matters relative to the compensation of officers should come
before us. There was no power by which men are obliged to take
the four dollars per day, when they think proper to take less. He
believed the Convention wanted an assistant secretary and another
sergeant-at-arms, and would vote for their election, and was
willing to give them the pay provided by law. He had offered
the resolution for the purpose of bringing the true question before
the Convention. If there had been no provision in the act of the
Legislature for the pay of the members, the number and salary of
its officers; if these matters had not been settled for us by the
Legislature, he would then be able to discover the propriety of the
discussion; but as all had been done by that body, he could
see no propriety in it. As to the pay of the members, he was
determined to take the four dollars a day, and no less; and would
not be afraid to go before his constituents and tell them he had
done so.

26 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

On motion of Mr. CONSTABLE, the amendment proposed
by Mr. McCallen was laid on the table — yeas 87, nays 56.

The question recurring on Mr. Archer's amendment;

Mr. LOGAN said, that he was inclined to take the vote
just had as decisive of the intention of the Convention to choose
the officers, and upon that subject would say no more. But the
resolution offered by the gentleman from Brown presents a
principle which he considered a heresy in politics, and as there
were two propositions before them, he preferred the amendment
of the gentleman from Pike. If the Convention were to say that
it was bound to do as bid by the Legislature, it would establish a
most dangerous precedent; and if they were obliged to follow the
direction of the Legislature in any one case, they are bound to do
so in all. — The constitution says a Convention may be called "to
amend, alter, and revise" — not to propose amendments; alter-
ations, and revisions. If the Legislature be right in saying the
Convention has only the right to propose a constitution, they have
the right to say what amendments, alterations, &c., shall be made.
He considered it wrong in principle and bad as a precedent. If
either of the propositions were to be passed, he preferred that of
the gentleman from Pike.

Mr. SINGLETON contended that the Legislature had the
power to regulate, to some extent, the manner in which the
Convention should be organized, and to direct its government in
all things that do not go to the proposed changes in the constitu-
tion. The present constitution gives the Legislature power to
call a Convention, and the Legislature has provided for that call,
and says we must come here, not with power to make changes,
but to propose changes to be acted on by the people. They have
no right to say to us what changes shall be made, but state in
what manner they shall be made.

By the constitution, the legislative powers of the state are
described to be vested in a House of Representatives and a
Senate, who, together, shall constitute a General Assembly.
Their powers are not limited, but they may exercise any power
not expressly limited by the constitution of the state, the consti-
tution of the United States, a law of Congress, or a treaty. Had
they a right to say that the changes proposed by this Convention

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 27

should be submitted to the people? If they had no right, I want
a direct vote on the matter. If they had, I am bound by what
they have done.

This Convention has those necessary, natural, inherent powers
of self-protection that all deliberative bodies possess; no other
power but what is derived from the Legislature, save the power
of self-defence.

Mr. PETERS said, that he had and would continue to vote
against any and every proposition which would recognize any
restriction of the powers of this Convention. We are here the
sovereignty of the state. We are what the people of the state
would be if they were congregated here in one mass meeting. We
are what Louis XIV said he was — "We are the state." We can
trample the constitution under our feet as waste paper, and no
one can call us to an account save the people. A resolution had
been passed by the Legislature presenting to the people the
question of a Convention or not. If a majority of the people chose
a Convention, then the law directed the Legislature to call that
Convention, and then its functions ceased. If they had named no
officers in their act, could not this Convention have selected as
many as they pleased ? If they had said we should have no officer
but a President, could we not have gone on and elected a secretary
and what officers we thought necessary? We can change any
organic law of this state that we please. My proposition is that
we have the power to adopt a constitution which, from the day of
its passage by this body, will be the supreme organic law of this
state, without any reference to the people. However, such a
course as that might not be advisable. — But there are many things
which I could not refer to the people, for instance, the council of
revision, and that because we know the sentiments of the people
on them already.

I am for economy. But I make no speeches on the subject
for home consumption. I am for allowing the members of this
body but two dollars a day.

Here the Convention adjourned til[l] 2, p. m.

28 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

AFTERNOON

Mr. DAVIS of Massac commenced by taking ground against
the superiority of the powers of the Convention as against the
enactment of the Legislature — the law-making power, established
and recognized by the supreme organic law of the state yet in
force. He reviewed the history of the act of the Legislature pro-
viding for a call of this Convention, and argued that it was both
constitutional and proper. As to economy — though in favor of
it — he scorned to consume the time of the house, so valuable, by
making speeches about it. He had voted to lay the proposition —
to let the printing out — on the table, because, in his opinion, they
had convened there for nobler ends than debating about such
trifles; they had convened to amend the organic law of the state,
so that it would conduce to their prosperity and happiness. He
understood the provision in the present constitution, relative to
the salaries of judges, very differently from the gentleman from
Sangamon. — The provision was made in the constitution that
they should receive a certain salary, but the Legislature of 1819
made the appropriation whereby the pay, thus fixed and estab-
lished in the constitution, could be drawn from the treasury.
And it was by virtue of their act, and not of the provision in the
constitution, that the money was paid out. That very same
Legislature, sir, made an appropriation to pay the members of
the Convention that framed the constitution; they fixed it at
four dollars a day. The officers and others were also paid by the
Legislature, who made the appropriation for them all. Not a
man in that convention of 1818, nor out of it, ever understood
that they could draw any money under the provisions of the con-
stitution, until the Legislature had made the necessary appro-
priation. He regretted, and it was universally regretted, that a
gentleman gifted with such powers, and from whose experience
and ability so much was justly expected, whose eminent talents
should lead them and aid the Convention in its important duties,
should have suffered himself to be led off into a discussion of
subjects so foreign to the matter before the Convention. He
alluded to the gentleman from Sangamon.

The gentleman who had made the most strenuous and potent

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 29

argument against the law of this Legislature was, if he had not
been greatly misinformed, in the last General Assembly, one of
its foremost and ablest supporters. If that law is wrong now, it
was wrong then; and why did he support it then? He (Mr. D.)
took a different view of this matter than that of gentlemen who,
from friends and advocates of the law, had become its denouncers.
Mr. SCATES offered an amendment — that the Convention
should proceed to the election of a printer, assistant secretary,
and door-keeper. He said this discussion had taken a wide range —
first it was the employment of a door-keeper, then the question
of retrenchment, then the powers of the Convention. He wished,
however, as all had the same object — economy — in view, that
they could see the means to accomplish it in the same light.
There might be an economy of time as well as money. The
question originally was to rescind; from which sprang the question
of the powers of the Convention, and economy — questions which
did not belong to the original question. While gentlemen were
discussing this matter, they had made declarations and pledged
themselves to carry out the principle of economy in all things that
should come before the Convention. When this came about he
expected to be in the first rank; none should go higher and none
lower in the scale of economy than he. He advised, then, an
organization of the Convention as soon as it could be affected,
though he did not desire to cut off any gentleman who might wish
to discuss this matter. He questioned, doubted, and denied the
power of the members to bind themselves, or their ofiicers, or
officers of the government, by any simple resolution of the body;
because, if not embodied in the constitution, it was not and could
not be a law — therefore, it was not obligatory.

[We have no legislative powers. Resolutions appropriating
money by dollars and half dollars is the administration of gov-
ernment which we have no power to do.

Suppose we say in our constitution that a certain amount of
money shall be paid our members and officers for their services,
will it be any more than an inoperative, inchoate act, until our acts
shall be confirmed by the people? Let the President of this Con-
vention issue certificates to these men and boys for their services,

30 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

will the Auditor, though he may have our resolution on his table,
pay any attention to it, or refuse to pay what the law of the state
directs? What an aspect would we present if these boys, receiv-
ing certificates under an appropriation made by this Convention,
and the chief officer of the State obeying the behests of the law,
and setting at defiance the supreme constitution-making power,
refuse to pay them but in the manner directed by the act of the
Legislature! What remedy? It is true you might invoke the
power of the courts of justice, obtain a mandamus to compel him,
&c.

Here we are — one hundred and sixty-two members, gravely
driving half dollar bargains with messengers and boys. To at-
tempt to undo the act of the Legislature by our resolution is im-
possible.— -We might as well go back and overhaul all legislation
had under the constitution, as this very law. The gentlemen are
disposed to make the compensation of these offices so low as to
take away the inducement to seek the office. He was disposed
to go as far as any; but he thought that the Convention could not
fix the price so low but that men will seek it. Men sometimes
seek office for the honor of it. The pay of the soldiers in the army
is but $io per month — and the post is not a very desirable one at
that, yet we have witnessed the scramble that has taken place to
get in the army; and there has been as much anxiety to get into
the ranks as to get into the offices of this Convention. He hoped
the Convention would now elect these officers and complete their
organization.

He regretted that so much time had been spent in demagog-
ueism [sic]; in making speeches for Buncome; in making speeches,
for effect upon the constituents of members and others, about
economy. In introducing ridiculous resolutions for this purpose,
he had witnessed the same at almost every session of the Legisla-
ture, and he asked why had they been introduced here? It had
been shown that these speeches about economy of cutting down
the Door-keeper's pay cost more than would pay all the officers
of the Convention for their services. — It was useless to continue
thus, at an expense of over six hundred dollars a day — -of one hun-
dred an hour — we should only have such discussion as would aid
us in our schemes of retrenchment, as much as we pay for it.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 31

He who first threw this gauntlet is responsible; on his head
rests the extravagance who first introduced this useless matter.
This is not the place to make a flourish — nor is it a place for ab-
stractions like those on your desk. I cannot subscribe to them;
they are but abstractions, why introduce and discuss them here ?]^

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that as there was some
disposition to close the discussion, he would take the present
opportunity of expressing his views in relation to the matter under
discussion before the Convention, and he deemed that he was not
doing more than he had a right to do. Those who complained so
much of the great consumption of time, its cost and its waste,
should remember that they had occupied their full share of the
time that had been consumed in making speeches themselves.
They should remember that there were many here who had never
before been members of a deliberative body — he was one of them —
and who were unacquainted with many things that were more
familiar to others. He had come here to receive information on
many points, and was in favor of a free and full discussion of every
subject matter that came before them. — Others had come with
written constitutions in their pockets, which, if the Convention
would adopt, as no doubt the gentlemen desired it would, they
might go home at once, and make great economy of time.

He thought it his privilege, though one of the humblest
members of the body, to express his views upon every subject
that he deemed necessary to discuss; and the exercise of that
privilege, which is guarantied to every delegate, would not
be influenced by the time it would consume. He should pursue
that course which his conscience dictated, regardless of what it
might cost, or the time it might occupy. If he did not do so, he
would not be true to the trust confided in him.

He considered that every subject should be properly under-
stood before they came to any conclusion; he was opposed to the
hot haste that some were desirous to follow.

Gentlemen had made statements in this Convention, had
made speeches that would be spread before the people, which

* The conclusion of Scates' speech, which was omitted from the tri- weekly
Illinois State Register, has been taken from the weekly of July 11.

32 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

might lead to prejudicial results as to other delegates in that body.
He was unwilling that this should be, unless along with them we
spread the views of those who happened to differ with those
gentlemen.

He did not believe in the omnipotence of this body. It was
necessary, before we could come here, that there should be some
legislation; that the Legislature should arrange those matters
which should be done before we could convene. Could the people
— the entire people — meet here at Springfield, the seat of govern-
ment, and, without the previous action of the Legislature pre-
scribed by the constitution, proceed to adopt the constitution?

No, sir, they could not. We meet here by the authority of a
supreme power, which has given vitality to this Convention?
Are not the regulations of that supreme power binding and im-
perative on us? Suppose a case: Let a vacancy occur in this
Convention — how would it be filled? Could this Convention pass
a law setting a day for the election of another to fill the vacancy?
I hardly think any delegate would say it could. I apprehend it
is not in our power to do any such thing. We must abide by the
law which has called us here for a particular purpose. During
the canvass for the members of this Convention, the tree of public
sentiment has been shaken, and the fruits are now collected in
this hall, and I am in favor of selecting the good and sound of
them, and of engrafting them on the constitutional stock. The
Convention of the state of New York sat for four months, and
complained that they had not sufficient time to discharge their
duties; and I suppose no gentleman will dispute that there was
as much talent in that Convention as in this. Yet the Legislature
that called them together had limited the time of their sitting to
four months, and they, proclaiming that they had not sufficient
time to perform the duties assigned them, adhered to and obeyed
that law strictly, as imperative upon them. We are sitting here
making an organic law for ourselves and for our children; the
duty is most important, and I am opposed to hasty action.— I
want to deliberate, to reflect — time to have the aid of others'
experience and views to aid me. I desire all the aid and advantage
to be derived from a full and free interchange of sentiment of
every delegate of this Convention.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 33

It has been said that the officers could be appointed by reso-
lution, and such a resolution had been adopted the first day of
this Convention. I have heard gentlemen of this Convention,
who were members of the very Legislature that passed this law,
and who voted for it, now come forward and denounce the law as
inoperative, and declare we are not bound by it. They go
further, and declare the Convention is above all law. Strange,
strange, that gentlemen in the Legislature should vote for a law,
and now get up here and denounce it, declaring that they had no
power to pass it.

Mr. LOGAN. The gentleman will allow me to say that this
law was passed before the Legislature had fixed the pay of its
members, and when I voted for it I had no idea the Legislature
would fix that pay at ^4 a day.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Then I would ask the gentleman if he did
not vote for the law which allowed members their present per diem?

Mr. LOGAN. No, sir. I asked to be excused from voting.
I had motives of delicacy to induce me to do so, which I need not
repeat. I did not vote at all.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Well, then, the gentleman says he did
not vote against the bill, for reasons best known to himself.

Mr. LOGAN. I hardly think the gentleman desires to mis-
represent me.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Certainly not, sir.

Mr. LOGAN. I did not say that I did not vote for reasons
best known to myself; but I did say from feelings of courtesy
towards members who came here from a distance, and who might
have supposed that, from the fact of my residing at the seat of
government, I might be influenced in my vote. That was the
reason, sir. I would have voted against it if my vote would have
had any effect.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Well, the gentleman cannot clear him-
self yet. He permits money to be taken out of the treasury, does
not vote against the law, but quietly permits it to be passed, and
now gets up here and denounces the appropriation contained
therein as extravagant. — Now, he had acted wrong, put the
matter in any shape. If he, (Mr. C.) considered a principle
wrong, he would be derelict in his duty if he did not resist it to

34 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the utmost of his efforts. This would have been his course if he
had been in the General Assembly. Were these assistant officers
necessary? If they were, why not vote for them? If they were
not, vote them down. But, no; they must have a discussion
upon saving a dollar or two in the wages. They must listen to
this everlasting retrenchment, whose ghost he really expected to
see stalking about that hall, and shaking its gory locks at those
who were so continually invoking it.

We are now in debt, say gentlemen. We are all satisfied of
that. How are we to get out of it? Why, say they, cut down
the pay of the door-keepers, and employ a few boys as pages ! A
gentleman delivers a speech full of commiseration for the widows
and orphans who hold our bonds, and who are suffering from
famine in foreign lands, and declares that we should not have a
door-keeper, because we owe them money. I am willing that that
speech shall go there, and the gentleman receive full merit for his
commiseration for their suffering; but I want another speech of
that gentleman to go along with it. I want then to know that
when an appropriation of j2o,ooo, at the last session of the Leg-
islature, was made for the completion of a magnificent building in
Springfield, the same gentleman advocated it most strenuously,
while at the same time these widows and orphans were famish-
ing because we did not pay them our debts; and that he now is
endeavoring to cut down two dollars a day from the salary of a
man to wait on the delegates. Let these facts all go together,
and then they can form a true idea of the sincerity of his com-
miseration for the widows and orphans! What would be said of
a gentleman who was in debt, largely, to a number of widows
and orphans — always a fine subject for tears — who would erect
a magnificent building worth |2o,ooo, for his own comfort and
convenience, and then say to his servants, I owe a large debt to
some widows and orphans who are famishing in a foreign land,
and to enable me to pay them, I must cut down your pay one-
half; to enable me to relieve their sufferings, I must lay a contri-
bution on you?

Look across the way, on the other side of your street, and you
will behold a magnificent edifice, with large fluted columns, and
Italian marble floors, erected at a time when 'widows and orphans'

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1S47 35

held their paper, which they could not, would not, never intended
to redeem. — [Applause.] Was the gentleman's voice heard then?
— Let us, let them, let these 'widows and orphans' judge of the
sincerity of the commiseration by facts. The time will come, the
day is not far distant, when we may read, on the massive open
panels of the door of that institution, this inscription, in chalky
whiteness — "This house to let." Yet it is hoped by some that out
of the ashes of this institution, another, phoenixlike, will arise,
with more brilliant plumage on its wing, a voice more finely toned
to delusion, but with a keener glance of vengeance in its eye,
greater strength in its pinion, and more power to destroy in its
talons, which shall out-Herod its ancient ancestor; but I trust
that ere this phcenix shall begin to live, these ashes to feel vitality,
the fiat of this Convention will scatter them to the four winds of
heaven. 1 JL i '> '■' *

The sins of omission are not so "bad in tKe sight of the people
as those <^ commission. He would prefer, then, to stay within
our proper undoubted bounds, rather than to venture on doubtful
questions.

Where is the restraint upon our powers? If we can appropri-
ate one dollar, we can ten. So far as altering, amending, or
abrogating the old constitution is concerned, we are (Mr. C.
said) sovereign. But when we go beyond that duty, the
constitution is as binding upon us as ever. That constitution
says no money shall be appropriated except by law. Who
can make the law? Can this Convention? If the Legis-
lature had not appropriated the money we could not receive one
cent; nor can we say that any member of this body shall draw less
than four dollars a day, as provided by the law of the Legislature.

He had been an attentive observer of the proceedings of the
Legislature of late. I have watched the progress of their economy.
I have seen them, when a bill for the reduction of their own pay
was before their body, voting for its passage, and, when it was on
its way to the Senate, trembling, like Balthazar of old, with their
knees shaking one against the other, with very fear that the
Senate would pass their own bill. I have seen them running to
and fro, electioneering with Senators to defeat the measure they
dared not vote against.

36 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. LOGAN. I hope the gentleman does not allude to me as
one of them.

Mr. C. No, sir, no. The gentlemen have a great desire to
have a starting point in their economy, and I have always noticed
that they make small officers like door-keepers the starting point.
When the magnificent building was proposed to be finished in
Springfield, they found that that would not do for a starting
point — "you must commence with the door-keepers." This, sir,
is saving up pennies with one hand and scattering dollars with
the other, while "widows and orphans" are famishing in foreign
lands. He had heard a member in the Legislature declare that,
during the whole session, he had not voted for an appropriation
of a single dollar; yet that same man quietly pocketed the four
dollars a day for his services.

The gentleman from Sangamon had read an extract from the
constitution of Vermont, which stated that the salaries of officers
should not be so high as to induce persons to seek them. That
same gentleman, however, when the proposition was to raise the
salaries of the judges, voted for it. Did he do this because there
were no applicants for the office? No applicants in Illinois for
judgeships! As regards the salaries of the judges, he was in
favor of making them sufficiently large to command talent.
Would any lawyer, he asked, who had by his talent and ability
raised himself into standing and reputation, and whose practice
allowed him to make $1,500 a year, accept a judgeship at one thou-
sand?— Certainly not, particularly if he had a family to support
and children to educate.

He would always be in favor of fair and reasonable salaries to
all officers. While we should not be prodigal on one hand, we
should not fix the pay so low that it would not command talent.
If low, men would seek it; if high, men would seek it; but if the
pay were reasonable, men of talent would present themselves,
would come into competition, and the people would elect them.
He fully concurred with the opinion that this Convention could
not compel a single delegate to forego one cent of the four dollars
a day allowed by the Legislature. He was willing to contribute
his share towards paying these officers, if the Convention would
not elect them, but not one cent upon compulsion.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE g, 1847 37

Let the members obtain the certificate from the President,
and go to the Auditor with them, and, though he has the resolution
of this body on his table, he will not refuse to pay them what the
law allows. If he does, get out a mandamus to compel him. He
admitted that if the law of the Legislature in any way directed
this Convention as to what charges should be made, so far it
would be inoperative — would not be binding. Was it the inten-
tion of any delegate to adopt a constitution as the organic law of
the state without submitting it to the people? He was certain
there was not, and therefore could see no propriety in discussing
the point.

The resolution of the gentleman from Pike states the object
of this Convention to be to alter, amend, and revise the constitu-
tion. I admit that for this purpose and object, the power of the
Convention is omnipotent, but no farther.

In conclusion, he hoped that after every gentleman had ex-
pressed his opinion who desired to do so, we would proceed to the
organization of the Convention. — He was not for hot haste in
any thing. The time taken up in discussing preliminary matters
was not altogether lost; nor had there been more of it here than
in other Conventions.

Mr. WOODSON thanked the gentleman from Jo Daviess for
the very liberal views he had expressed. He agreed with him
that there was no necessity for haste. The matters that had been
discussed would, at some future time, have been presented to us;
and he considered it as well that they should be fully discussed
and settled now. They had taken a wide range. He regretted
that one gentleman from Fulton, who had participated much in
the discussion, had thought necessary to move, to-day, upon
every question that was presented, to lay on the table; thereby
cutting off all opportunities for debate. Gentlemen had com-
plained about the consumption of time. One of them, from Lee,
had entered into a calculation upon the subject; and if we apply
his calculation to his own speeches, it would appear that he had
already cost the state ?2,ooo. The only speeches that had been
made on their side were those by the gentleman from Peoria and
Sangamon. The Convention had voted down the proposition to
have the printing let out to the lowest bidder, and that without

38 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

debate. The gentleman from Fulton had expressed his determina-
tion to cut of[f] all debate, by moving to lay every proposition
on the table, until the Convention had organized.

Mr. WEAD explained that such was not his object.

Mr. WOODSON resumed. He considered that the Conven-
tion had sovereign power. Gentleman may speak of demagogue-
ism, but he, when a principle was involved of such importance as
that advocated by his friend from Sangamon, was of opinion that
it was immaterial what the cost was, if the discussion would
enable them to arrive at the true principles on which they should
act. He had no idea that what he would say would have much
effect upon the Convention; he spoke with great mistrust of his
own power and abilities. He denied that this Convention was a
creature of the Legislature — that it had called the Convention
into being. They had been called there by a preliminary act of
a former Legislature, on which the people had passed. — He
contended for the right of the Convention to say whether the
constitution they might adopt should be submitted to the people
or not.

Mr. W. pursued the subject at some length, and we regret
that from the want of space we cannot give the whole of the report
of his speech furnished us.^

Mr. WHITNEY advocated, briefly, the immediate organiza-
tion of the Convention by the election of the remaining officers.

Mr. KNOWLTON had been astonished and amused at the
course which had been pursued by some gentlemen during this
discussion. While he admitted that there was such a thing as
economy of time, he would remind gentlemen that even the world
was not made in a day. He knew a man where he came from
who had a constitution already written out, which, if he had
thought of bringing [it] with him, might have been adopted, and
they could now have been on their way home. He spoke at much
length upon the importance of small matters when a great principle
was concerned, and urged the necessity of always meeting them
with an ample discussion. He would tell the gentleman from
Jo Daviess that if the ghost of murdered Retrenchment came

"A longer account of Woodson's speech may be found in the Sangamo
Journal, June 17.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 39

into that hall, the gentleman from Jo Daviess would never be
troubled by him. He would never be called upon to explain,
with Macbeth, 'Avaunt! shake not thy gory locks at me, I did it
not;' because no one would think of accusing that gentleman of
anything connected with retrenchment. Mr. K. continued the
subject much further, alluding particularly to the desire of his
constituents to have the enormous allowances made for printing
reduced.

Mr. Archer replied briefly to Mr. K. and urged the views
presented by him when he offered his amendment.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell said that he had come here under
the expectation of meeting civilized men in Convention; men that
had been, at least, decently educated. But, no; those whom
he had heard had given way to the use of that weapon called
sarcasm. Gentlemen had forgotten that courtesy which should
teach them to speak to and of each other more respectfully. This
he said had been the impression made on him. He said that if
he had come into the hall while one of them was speaking, he
would most certainly have thought that a certain young man had
fancied himself a David; that on the other side of the room had
sprung up a Goliath; and this young man was prepared with his
small pebble and sling to kill the monarch of the Philistines.

He had heard the law expounded by judges, doctors, and
readers of the law, and had heard as many opinions of what the
law was as he had persons discuss it.^-What was to be done?
When doctors disagree who shall decide? Mr. G. denied the
power of the Legislature to control or limit the powers of this
Convention. He hoped to hear no more about omnipotencey
\sic\. There was no omnipotence among frail men — even if there
were one hundred and sixty-two of them.

Mr. LOGAN said it was not his wont to discuss questions
after he had ascertained that such discussion was to have no effect.
But he desired to say a few words in reply to what had been said
concerning himself. Gentlemen had cast out insinuations upon
the motives which had governed the actions and speeches of
others; they might do so, for they had no effect upon him; he
passed them by as the idle wind, which he regarded not. It had,
also, been said that speeches had been made for Buncombe, &c.;

40 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

but he could assure gentlemen that he had as little use for such
matters as any others.

He had stated, when he first spoke, that the door-keeper and
secretary were the trifling matters, and should not have contended
on that point if it had stood alone. The gentleman from Clinton
had offered this resolution, and he should have been the object
of the gentlemen's wrath. They had, however, permitted his
friend to escape, and had poured out all their vials of wrath on
his (Mr. L.'s) head. When he saw the vote this morning, he
considered and was satisfied that the matter was decided; but
the gentlemen had continued their attacks upon him.

He had no desire to turn upon these gentlemen with angry
feelings, for the truth was that there was no truth in anything that
had been said of him, except what the gentleman from Jo Daviess
had said. He cared nothing for the falsehoods; but when there
was truth in the attack, he was disposed to admit its effect.

He had not the least idea that the Legislature would raise the
pay of the members above ^3, and when they said ^3.50, and sent
it to the Senate, he was astonished. The Senate increased it to
four dollars, and it came back to the House. He was disposed
to vote against it, but in consequence of the motives of delicacy
and courtesy mentioned before, and because he had just succeeded
in getting through an appropriation of twenty thousand dollars,
for the purpose of clearing away the dirt and rubbage scattered
around this square, he interposed no objection to the per diem
fixed. He felt he had done wrong, and he now candidly admitted
that he was wrong in not voting against that which he considered
wrong in principle. The law allowed some of the judges ?i,soo
and others $1,000, and to make them all alike, and as they were
to remain in office but a short time, he had voted to pay them all
alike.

He still urged that the Convention should exercise the strictest
economy. The state was insolvent. He had, in consequence of
endorsing for a friend, become insolvent himself. He had prac-
ticed retrenchment in all of his expenses of living until he had
paid every cent he owed. The state should do the same. He
was willing to jeopard his popularity, and would go as far as any
man in so doing, by making the people pay her debt.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1847 41

Mr. ARCHER'S amendment was then adopted.

The question was taken on the final adoption of the first
resolution, and it was carried — yeas 87, nays 64. The second
was also adopted.

The Convention then proceeded to the election of an assistant
secretary; when, H. G. Reynolds received 84 votes; J. M. Burt,
60; J. S. Roberts, 5; and Mr. Reynolds was declared elected.

The Convention divided on the nomination of Mr. R. Wood-
ruff, as assistant door-keeper; when he received 86 votes, and
was elected.

The Convention then divided on the election of a printer, and
Messrs. Lanphier & Walker received 88 votes, and were
elected.

On motion, 200 hundred [sic] copies of the rules were ordered
to be printed. And then the Convention adjourned until 9
o'clock, to-morrow.

IV. THURSDAY, JUNE lo, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Dresser J

Mr. MINSHALL presented a resolution setting forth proposed
amendments to the present judicial system of the state; which
was,

On motion of Mr. MANLY, laid on the table.

Mr. DUNSMORE presented a resolution. Adopted.

Mr. WOODSON presented a resolution that the Convention
should meet at 8, a. m., and adjourn at 12, m., and meet again
at 3, and adjourn at 6, p. m., each day.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess thought that sessions of six
hours each day were enough in this crowded hall, and this season
of the year. He was in favor of meeting in the forenoon, and
allowing the afternoon for the committees.

Mr. SINGLETON thought it would be more conducive to the
health of the members that they should be in the hall during the
heat of the day.

Mr. SCATES was in favor of short sessions each day, and that
the committees should have sufficient time to perform their work.
He would vote to meet at nine, and leave the Convention to
regulate its time of adjournment.

Mr. SHUMWAY opposed the resolution.

Mr. ROBBINS was in favor of the proposed hour of meeting,
but opposed to the fixed hours of adjournment, as such would

'Rev. Charles Dresser: bom February 24, 1800, at Pomfret, Connecticut;
1823, graduated from Brown University; went to Virginia and studied the-
ology with Dr. Meade (afterward Bishop Meade); 1829, ordained as minister
of the Protestant Episcopal church; April, 1838, arrived at Springfield,
Illinois; 1838-1852 (1855?), rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church of Spring-
field; November 4, 1842, performed marriage ceremony for Abraham Lincoln
and Mary Todd; 1855, elected Professor of Divinity and Belles Lettres in
Jubilee College and remained in that position some time; 1858, given degree
of D. D. by St. Paul's College, Missouri; returned to Springfield, wheie he
died March 25, 1865.

Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 137; Bateman
and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois; History of Sangamon County,
2: 889; Power, History of the Early Settlers of Sangamon County, 268, 269;
Inter-State Pubhshing Company, History of Sangamon County, 659.
42

THURSDAY, JUNE lo, 1847 43

lead to much inconvenience to the Convention. He offered to
meet at 8 a. m.

Mr. PALMER moved to lay the resolution and amendment
on the table. Carried.

Mr. CONSTABLE offered a resolution providing that the
Convention should meet each day at 8, a. m., and 3, p. m.

Mr. ROBBINS moved to strike out "3, p. m." Lost.

The resolution was then adopted.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison offered a resolution increasing
the number of committees. Adopted.

Mr. HAYES offered a resolution providing for a submission
to the people of every amendment to the constitution, separately.

Mr. DEMENT moved to refer the resolution to the committee
on the Revision and Adjustment of the Constitution.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to lay the motion of reference on
the table; which was carried. The resolution was then laid on
the table.

Mr. ADAMS offered a resolution calling on the Secretary of
State for certain information relative to literary matters and the
state of the school fund. Adopted.

Mr. PETERS offered a resolution to amend the rules by adding
that there shall be [a] "committee on Townships." Laid on the
table.

Mr. HARVEY offered a resolution to increase the number of
committees by adding a "committee on the State Debt." Laid
on the table.

A resolution was offered, and adopted, providing for a "com-
mittee on Legislative Business."

Mr. DAVIS of Massac offered a resolution that a quorum of
this Convention, to do business, shall consist of two-thirds of the
delegates elected, (108 members to constitute a quorum.)
Adopted.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved that 200 copies of the constitution of
the state be printed for the use of the Convention. Adopted.

Mr. WOODSON presented a preamble and resolution setting
forth various proposed alterations in the state government. Laid
on the table.

Mr. SCATES offered a resolution requiring information from

44 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the revenue clerks of the different counties; which, after some
debate, and various proposed amendments had been voted down,
was laid on the table.

Mr. ARCHER presented a preamble and resolution relating
to several proposed amendments to the constitution, and moved
their reference to a committee.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to lay the motion to refer and the
resolution on the table. Carried.

Mr. SCATES presented a resolution that a select committee
should be appointed to apportion the business among the several
standing committees.

Mr. KNOWLTON moved to lay the resolution on the table.
Which was carried.

Mr. WHITNEY moved to adjourn till to-morrow, at 9, a. m.,
to enable the President to appoint the standing committees.

Mr. BALLINGALL inquired of the Chair if that time would
be sufficient.

The CHAIR replied that he did not think he could appoint
them before Monday next.

Mr. WHITNEY then withdrew the motion to adjourn.

Mr. McCALLEN offered a resolution providing that the
standing committees should be chosen proportionately from the
congressional districts.

Messrs. Whitney and Adams opposed the resolution; and, on
motion, it was laid on the table.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond offered a resolution in relation to the
judiciary. Laid on the table.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin offered a resolution on the same
subject. Laid on the table.

Mr. EVEY offered a resolution regulating the powers of the
General Assembly, the pay of its members, &c. — Laid on the
table.

The Convention then adjourned till to-morrow, 9 a. m.

V. FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Hale.'

The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention a petition, re-
ceived by him through the post office, praying certain reforms in
the judiciary department of the state government; which was
read, in part, and laid on the table.

Mr. NORTHCOTT presented a resolution proposing to give
the Legislature power to levy a poll-tax, to be appropriated to
certain purposes. Laid on the table.

Mr. ROUNTREE presented a resolution establishing a court
of record, and abolishing certain other offices. Laid on the
table.

Mr. JENKINS offered a resolution providing for the election
of state and county officers, their salaries, members of the Legis-
lature, and their per diem. Laid on the table.

Mr. SCATES presented a resolution limiting the power, sala-
ries, and term of office of the Executive, members of the Legislature,
public printer, and other officers, and moved its reference to a
committee of the whole Convention. He had embodied in it a
series of questions which would occupy the time of the Convention
hereafter, and he proposed that we should now go into committee
where we might at once enter into a discussion of all the various
subjects; and that the several committees might thereby be aided

*Rev. Albert Hale: bom November 29, 1799, at Glastonbury, Connecti-
cut; 1813-1821, clerk in country store at Wethersfield; 1827, graduated from
Yale; agent of American Tract Society in South Carolina, Florida, and Geor-
gia; returned to Yale and completed theological course; 1830, ordained to
the ministry; preached for a few months near Boston, making his home with
Rev. Lyman Beecher; Noyember 11, 1831, arrived at Shawneetown, Illinois;
1832-1839, made his home in Bond County, doing missionary work there and
traveling over the state as evangelist; exercised a powerful influence over the
Indians in Chicago; 1839-1866, pastor of Second Presbyterian Church of
Springfield ; devoted remainder of life to missionary work ' ' among the extreme-
ly poor and the pariahs of society;" died in Springfield, January 30, 1891.

Bateman and Selby , Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 215; Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois; History of Sangamon County, 2 :
862 ; Power, History of the Early Settlers of Sangamon County, 348 ; Inter-State
Publishing Company, History of Sangamon County, 605, 671.

46 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

in arriving at the views of the Convention upon each subject.
As there were no standing committees to which these resolutions
could be referred, he hoped they would adopt his suggestion, and
refer them all to a committee of the whole.

Mr. ECCLES agreed with the gentleman from Jefferson, and
supported his proposition.

Mr. JENKINS opposed it, as the debate on these questions
would have to be all gone over again when the subject came
properly before the Convention. He moved to lay the resolu-
tion on the table. Carried.

Mr. ROBBINS presented a resolution, that the delegates from
each congressional district should meet to-day, at 2, p. m., and
appoint from their number a select committee of two from each
district, to aid the Chair in appointing standing committees of
the Convention; and supported his proposition with some remarks.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved to lay the motion on
the table; which was carried.

Mr. SHIELDS offered a resolution, changing the time of
holding state elections from August to November. — Laid on the
table.

Mr. ARCHER offered three resolutions — i, that the secretary
should be authorized to procure such well-bound books as were
necessary for the keeping of the proceedings of this Convention;
2, that he should be authorized, when necessary, to employ a
copyist; the purport of the third the reporter could not catch.
On motion, the two last were laid on the table.

Mr. Palmer of Macoupin moved to amend the first, by
authorizing the employment of an additional secretary to do the
copying.

The resolution and amendment were then withdrawn.

Mr. THOMAS renewed the resolution.

Mr. LOUDON denied the necessity of the resolution.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to amend the resolution by adding
that a committee shall be appointed to inquire into the propriety
and cost of employing a person to report the proceedings of the
Convention for the state.

Mr. THOMAS hoped the amendment would be withdrawn, as
it had no connection with the subject matter of the first.

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 184.7 47

Mr. SINGLETON thought the subject was an important one,
and that something of the kind should be adopted; but for the
present withdrew his amendment.

Mr. KITCHELL moved to amend, by striking out all
after the word "resolved," and insert "that the Secretary of State
be requested to furnish the necessary books, and that the Con-
vention proceed to the election of an assistant secretary, whose
duty it would be to do the copying."

Mr. WHITNEY moved to lay the subject on the table.

The question was taken on laying the amendment on the table,
and decided in the affirmative — ayes 87, noes not counted.

The motion to lay the orig[i]nal on the table was then with-
drawn.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair moved to amend by providing that
the additional secretary perform the duty of copying the journal.

Mr. ARCHER stated that he had not withdrawn his resolution
because it conflicted with the resolution adopted yesterday. He
thought very differently. He also considered that the Convention
had an implied right over its officers, and power to direct their
duties.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair gave his reasons for offering the
amendment. He questioned the power of the Convention to
appoint officers other than by the name stated in the law of the
legislature; at least, that such officer[s] could be paid without an
appropriation by the legislature.

Mr. SCATES said, that the Convention had a right to employ
any officers necessary for the transaction of business, but they
would have to wait for their pay until the legislature should make
an appropria'tion for the purpose. He opposed action in the mat-
ter at the present time, because there was not sufficient copying
yet to be done to afford a man sufficient employment. He hoped
they would postpone the matter. He moved to lay the matter
on the table. Carried.

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough offered a resolution providing
that no negro, Indian, mulatto, or other person of mixed blood,
or one-eighth blood, should attain, have, or use the rights of
citizenship under the constitution this Convention should adopt.

48 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. THOMAS moved to postpone the resolution till the first
of December next. Carried.

Mr. BROCKMAN offered a resolution that no new county-
shall be hereafter organized by the legislature, unless it shall
contain an area of 400 square miles.

Mr. WORCESTER offered a resolution providing for the
election of state and county superintendents of common schools,
&c.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to amend, by prohibiting the legis-
lature from borrowing at any time any of the college or seminary
funds.

On motion of Mr. PETERS, the resolution and amendment
were laid on the table.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL offered, as an additional rule, that no
member, when addressing the Convention, shall speak over one
hour. Laid on the table.

Mr. KNAPP offered a resolution proposing, as a part of the
new constitution, that no county shall be entitled to more than
two members, &c.' Laid on the table.

Mr. GEDDES offered a resolution providing that all elections
hereafter shall be by ballot; to which was offered an amendment,
that no one should vote at such elections except free white male
citizens and such unnaturalized foreigners as had heretofore
exercised the privilege. Laid on the table.

Mr. WEAD offered a resolution calling for information from
the Auditor about the public debt, the means present and pro-
spective of paying the same, &c.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond, believing no such information could be
obtained, moved to lay it on the table, but withdrew the motion.

Mr. WEAD said, his desire in presenting the resolution was
to obtain all the information possible, with a view of putting in
the new constitution some provision to liquidate the debt. He

' At the close of the debates for Friday, June 18, the Illinois Slate Register
of June 19, published the following correction by Knapp :

"Mr. Editor: Will you be kind enough to publish this communication
in your next paper, by way of correcting some errors, which have been made
doubtless by your reporter unintentionally. In a previous number you report
'Mr. Knapp' as offering a resolution that 'no county shall have more than
two representatives nor less than one.' That was ofiEered by Mr. Bosby-

SHELL."

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847 49

said that, even if all the Auditor knew of the matter had been
reported, they could get that much information at least. The
Auditor could tell them what property the state had, what means
she had of paying the debt, and when the debt was payable. If
it should turn out, (and this information would be of some assist-
ance to them in coming at some conclusion,) that a low tax would
pay the annual interest and finally the debt, they could decide on
the measure.

The state was laboring under the stain of not having
provided for the payment of the interest on her debt, and his
constituents felt more interest in that than in any other matter.

Mr. LOGAN was in favor of the resolution, but he suggested
that part of it was misdirected. It would be as well, indeed more
proper, to address the first part of the resolution to the Fund
Commissioner. The amendment suggested was accepted.

Mr. Z. CASEY suggested that they could perhaps obtain
more information by directing the inquiry to the Governor, who
had returned from the east, where he had gone in relation to some
matters connected with the state debt. He no doubt possessed
the information.

Mr. LOGAN said, that he had spoken under the impression
that the Governor had not returned.

Mr. WEAD accepted the suggestion as an amendment.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to add, that he be requested to inform
them of the result of his negotiation; which amendment was
accepted.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin suggested that it would be proper
to amend by asking the information so far as the Governor might
deem did not conflict with the public interest.

Mr. WHITESIDE said, neither the Fund Commissioner or
the Auditor could furnish the information called for by the
resolution. Those officers had been called upon before, and
there were no materials in their possession upon which they could
report. He suggested some other officer.

Mr. Z. CASEY said, the Governor, if required to furnish the
information, could call upon all the diflPerent officers to furnish
him with what each particular branch of the government had
charge of. He hoped the resolution would pass.

50 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. DEMENT hoped the resolution would pass; and by calling
upon the Governor for the information he possessed, we could
receive all that was possessed by the various officers under his
control.

The resolution was then adopted.

Mr. GRIMSHAW offered a resolution calling upon the various
county clerks for information in regard to the revenue of their
respective counties, &c. Carried — yeas 78, nays 22.

Mr. WOODSON offered, as an additional rule, that no standing
rule of the Convention should be rescinded or suspended, except
by a vote of two-thirds. Lost— ayes 39, noes not counted.

Mr. SCATES moved that the rules adopted by the Conven-
tion some days ago be referred to a committee of the whole, for
the purpose of amending or altering them.

Mr. THOMAS asked if the rules had been adopted by the
Convention for their government; and, if so, had the vote by
which they were adopted been reconsidered?

The CHAIR replied that the rules had been adopted; that
the vote adopting them had not been reconsidered; and that he
did not think it in order to refer the rules, as moved by the gentle-
man from Jefferson.

Mr. DEMENT inquired if any delegate were to propose an
amendment to the rules, whether it would not be in order to refer
that amendment to the committee of the whole; and, being
answered in the affirmative, said he hoped they would follow the
suggestion.

Mr. Z. CASEY said, he thought there was no necessity for the
Convention to go into committee of the whole to amend the rules.
They were the rules of the Convention, adopted by the Conven-
tion, and governed by the Convention could do with them as
they pleased. — They had adopted them, and, at any time, could
alter or repeal them. If you refer the rules to the committee,
they govern there as well as in Convention, and you could do no
more there with them than here. He thought it better and
easier for the Convention to amend the rules than by referring
them.

Mr. WOODSON agreed with the gentleman from Jefferson
last up. He was satisfied that gentleman was right. The

FRIDAY, JUNE it, 1847 51

Convention could, by a bare majority, amend the rules, and
there was but little to be done in amending them.

Mr. DEMENT said, that he was not anxious to get the
matter into committee of the whole, but as the gentleman from
Jefferson had expressed a desire to that effect, he had only made
a suggestion as to the proper means of arriving at his object. He
had voted against the resolution requiring a two-third vote to
amend the rules, because he knew the rules had been adopted
without discussion, and that, perhaps, some members desired to
have them altered. He was satisfied with them, and, when they
had again been voted on, would be in favor of the two-third rule.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond had been informed that the rules had
been adopted by the Convention; there was no necessity of a
further discussion of them. If it was desired to amend, let the
proposition be made and voted on.

Mr. SCATES had no other desire in moving to go into com-
mittee of the whole than that of economizing time. He had no
intention to propose any amendment, nor was he in favor of chang-
ing any of them, except, perhaps, the number required by the
6th rule to demand the yeas and nays. He might vote to reduce
it from ten to a smaller number.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said, that as gentlemen had
expressed themselves satisfied with the rules, he would move to
reconsider the vote by which the two-third rule had been rejected.
He had voted against it because gentlemen desired to discuss and
amend the rules; there being none such now appearing, he was for
having stability in them. He made the motion to reconsider.

Mr. LOGAN thought it too soon to adopt the two-third rule
in regard to amending the rules. He hoped the members would
allow the rules to stand a little while longer, until they should have
time to try them and see how they answered. He knew little or
nothing about rules — he was no connoisseur in them; he wished
to try what they had adopted; and if they found anything wanted
amendment, they could adopt it.

Mr. PALMER withdrew his motion to reconsider.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to strike out "ten," in the 6th rule,
and insert "four."

Mr. LOGAN said, this thing of calling the yeas and nays

52 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

occupied great time, and he was sure there could arise no questions
where it was in the least important to have them, but ten members
could be found who would second the demand. He could not
conceive a case where this would occur. There was no charm in
the numbers ten or four, and he thought ten was small enough.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison opposed the change because,
from experience, he knew the time uselessly occupied and wasted
in calling the yeas and nays.

The CHAIR suggested that it was necessary to reconsider the
vote by which the rule had been adopted, as it was not in order to
amend what had been passed.

Mr. MINSHALL moved to reconsider the vote by which the
rules had been adopted, and asked the unanimous consent that
it be passed now, and not lay [sic] over for three days.

Mr. PRATT thought the proper way to bring the rules before
them was to suspend the 17th rule, which required three days'
notice of every motion to reconsider.

Mr. LOGAN hoped they would be taken up by unanimous
consent; they had nothing else to do, and they might as well
dispose of that matter.

Mr. SHUMWAY thought still, that, even by unanimous
consent, they could not be taken up on a motion to reconsider;
and he moved to suspend the 17th rule, to enable them to do so.

Mr. PRATT agreed with the gentleman last up, and pressed
the matter on the attention of the Convention.

Mr. SHERMAN proposed the reading of the rules one at a
time, and that all propositions to amend should be made then.

The CHAIR ruled that they could take a vote on the motion
to reconsider by unanimous consent.

Mr. WILLIAMS was willing to take the vote now, as he
hoped they would get to the discussion of the great questions
they had been sent here to settle. It would be time enough to
amend the rules when we had discovered that we had been too
hasty in adopting them. — If the majority thoughtproper to change
the number in the 6th rule, and put it in the power of a few to
demand the yeas and nays, they could at any time do so, and he
would not now object to a vote on the matter; but he was not in

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847 53

favor of lessening the number; on the contrary, he would prefer
that it was greater.

Mr. BUTLER moved the previous question.

The CHAIR said that, upon reflection, he thought the motion
to suspend the 17 th rule was the proper one.

Mr. POWERS advocated the suspension.

The question was taken on suspending the 17th rule, and
agreed to.

Mr. DEMENT called for the reading of the rules.

Mr. Z. CASEY proposed that they should read the rules one
after another, commencing at the first and continuing on till done
with them; and that members, having amendments, should offer
them at the reading of the rule they desired to amend. He said
that, as an excuse to the Convention for having interfered
in this matter so much, he would state that he was a member of
the committee that had reported these rules, and he was somewhat
surprised that this Convention adopted them so hastily. It was
an unusual thing, and he had considered it somewhat of a com-
pliment to the committee, who had drawn them up in a great hurry.

Mr. PALMER of Stark said that it was, in his opinion, pre-
mature to revise the rules of the Convention at this time. He was
willing to retain them as they were until it appeared that there
was something in them which impeded the progress of the Con-
vention in the transaction of its business.

Mr. THOMAS said, he hoped the vote would be taken whether
the Convention was satisfied with the rules, as they stood at
present, or not. As to the number which should be in the 6th
rule to demand the yeas and nays, he was in favor of 20 instead
of 10. It reminded him of an anecdote which he had heard in
the Legislature when it sat in Vandalia. The House of Repre-
sentatives gave one of its members leave of absence till the first
of March, because he called the yeas and nays so often.

Mr. BALLINGALL was in favor of an amendment to the
loth rule; he was in favor of striking from that rule the exclusion
of the yeas and nays from the proceedings of the committee of
the whole. In committee, the most important questions would
be decided, and put in the constitution they would adopt, and
yet their constituents could not tell how they had voted.

54 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon offered two additional rules;
which were adopted.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond called for the reading of the rules.

The PRESIDENT then read the rules one after the other,
pausing between each for propositions to amend. At the I2th
rule,

Mr. McCALLEN moved to substitute for the rule as it now
stands, the following: "All standing committees shall be ap-
pointed by the President, to be chosen alternately, two members
from each congressional district; and that such committees shall,
by ballot, select their own chairmen." The amendment was lost.

Mr. ROBBINS moved to amend the i6th rule, by adding
thereto — "and each member, while speaking, shall confine him-
self to the subject matter before the Convention."

The House was dividing on the amendment, when the yeas
and nays were demanded, and ordered.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison said, the amendment was entirely
unnecessary. It was the duty of the President to confine the
members to the question before the Convention.

Pending the call of the yeas and nays, the Convention ad-
journed till 3, p. M.

AFTERNOON

Mr. ROBBINS withdrew his call of the yeas and nays.

Mr. PRATT renewed the call.

Mr. HAY moved to amend the amendment, by limiting all
speeches to thirty minutes. The amendment to the amendment
was laid on the table — yeas 80.

The amendment was then laid on the table — ayes 85, noes not
counted.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to amend the 17th rule, by striking
out all after the word "Convention," in the 3d line. Lost.

Mr. PALMER moved to strike out all from the word "except"
to the word "twice," inclusive, in the i8th rule. Lost.

A rule, that the rules of the Convention might be suspended
or amended in part, or in whole, by a vote of two-thirds, was
offered by some member (name not known to the reporter) and
adopted; also, a rule that a motion to adjourn, the previous

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847 55

question, to lay on the table, to refer, to postpone, and to postpone
indefinitely, should always be in order, to be decided without
debate, and should have precedence in the order named, was
adopted; and then the rules were concluded.

Mr. WILLIAMS hoped that the resolutions offered yesterday
by the gentleman from Green (Mr. Woodson) would be taken
up, by the Convention, from the table, and that we would now
proceed to the discussion of the principles contained in them. By
so doing, we would be approaching nearer a decision of something.
Without this, there would be nothing for us to do.

The motion was carried, and the following resolutions were
taken up :

Resolved, That the government of the state of Illinois shall
consist of three co-ordinate departments, each independent of the
other; and that the powers of the government should be so divided
and so distributed among these departments that neither of them
could, without the consent and co-operation of at least one of the
others, injuriously affect either of the great rights of personal
liberty and private property.

Resolved, That the necessary distribution of power for this
purpose is into legislative, judicial, and executive departments:
theiirst is to prescribe general rules for the government of society;
the second, to expound and apply these rules to individuals in
society; the third, to enforce obedience to the judgment and
decrees of the second, and see that the laws are faithfully executed.

The propriety of arguing and discussing these resolutions, at
the present time, was urged by Messrs. Williams, Logan,
Servant, Davis of Bond, Brockman, and Minshall, and
opposed by Mr. Palmer of Stark.

[Mr. WILLIAMS said, that it would be perceived that if we
now proceed to the discussion of these resolutions, and interchange
our sentiments and views upon them, and come to a decision on
the subjects contained in them, that we will decide the three
great questions — the executive, judicial and legislative depart-
ments— to be decided; and that after that we would have but
little more than a bill of rights.

It is important that the Convention should commence the dis-

56 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

cussion. If we took but a single question at a time, and every
member who desires to do so would express his views and propose
his amendments, we would soon get through; and in this way we
will have done the most of what we came here to perform. I
move, then, that we take them up — these two first resolutions
and discuss them coolly and calmly, and then proceed to the dis-
cussion and decision of the others.

Mr. SERVANT said, that if the Convention was disposed to
economize both time and money, he would suggest to the gentle-
man from Adams, to permit these resolutions to be laid on the
table, to have them printed in bill form, so that members would
be enabled to understand and see these resolutions before them
and in such a way that they might examine and weigh the
matters contained in them. He thought that some of the propo-
sitions contained in these resolutions could not be better nor
more in accordance with his views; and to others, also contained
in them, he was opposed.

He was in favor of taking up all the great questions one at a
time. For instance, in the first place, we might discuss the proper
number of senators and representatives to constitute our General
Assembly, the length of time they should sit, whether annual or
biennial sessions, the per diem to be allowed them, &c. After
we had fully discussed this branch of the government, we might
proceed to the Executive department; take up the Governor and
the Lieutenant Governor, discuss the proper time for them to
hold office, their salaries, powers, &c. Then we might pass to the
Judiciary, settle the number of judges, the length of their terms of
service, if elective, their salaries — both supreme and circuit courts,
and all matters connected with them.

It would be idle for any committee of this Convention to dis-
regard the expressed views of the members. If gentlemen would
not speak of the time consumed in debate but had proceeded to
the organization and pursued the legitimate business of the Con-
vention; if they who spoke most of the economy of time, had not
themselves consumed, some of them, five, four, three and two
hundred dollars worth of time, much might have been done. It
was not too late yet to retrace their steps. Let them then go to
work, perform 5he business they were sent here to transact, and

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847 57

then they would not be afraid to go home to their constituents,
who would receive them with approval of ' 'well done, good and
faithful servants." Let us do this; let us take up and discuss
these great questions, and after we shall have expressed our opin-
ions upon them, nothing will be required but a committee of
revision to prepare them in detail, and then go home.

Mr. PALMER, of Stark, said that he held in his hand the act
of the Legislature which called them together to revise, alter and
amend the constitution of the State. We had met under that
call. He also held in his hand the present constitution of the
State. He supposed the proposition to amend would begin with
the first article of that constitution, and that, pursuing a similar
plan as that followed in relation to the rules, we would go down,
article after article, section, after section, until we had gone
through with it, amending it as we went along in every place that
we thought it needed amendments. This, it seemed to him,
would be the proper course; to follow the other would be to act
as if there was no constitution of the State now in force nor in ex-
istence. He hoped they would take it up article by article, and
amend it so far as they thought it required to be done. Then,
after having gone through with it and made all the amendments
necessary, let members propose new articles, to be added to the
constitution, and we could adopt such as we thought proper and
conducive to the general welfare and prosperity. He appealed
to his friends and fellow-citizens of the Convention to adopt this
course. These resolutions were nothing but the expression of
individual opinions, to have them printed would cost the State
a great deal of money, and if they were printed there would be
others to be printed, for all of which the State would have to pay.]'"

Mr. WILLIAMS said, it had been suggested to him that itwould
be just as well to lay these resolutions on the table, and have them
printed, and made the special order for Monday next.

[Mr. LOGAN. I can see n|||JM|^t in postponing this matter.
Why not begin now? What,«HH»e we to do? Why not pro-

'" The detailed reports of tlicse SjleecMfe have been taken from the weekly
Illinois State Register, June IS. / •

58 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ceed in the discussion of the questions proposed in these resolu-
tions? Why not hear the different opinions, views and senti-
ments of the members and melt them down — amalgamate them
into one? Hear the views of gentlemen on these principles, in
opposition to them, and the modifications of them. Here are
assembled one hundred and sixty-two members, each has an
opinion; we had better have them melted down one into another —
modify one member's opinion by that of others. He hoped they
would select some subjects — he did not care what — and proceed
now, this very afternoon, to the discussion of them. They had
nothing better to do; nothing else to do.

Mr. DAVIS, of Bond, said, that the remarks of the gentleman
from Sangamon were very applicable. He, too, hoped they would
proceed to the discussion of the various subjects that were open
to them, and which must be, in some form or another, discussed.
There must, at some time, be an opinion expressed on these sub-
jects. There was the election of the judges, how the courts
should be organized, the naturalization laws, the great question
of banks. These are questions upon which the Convention would
have to act. There were 162 members of the Convention, all
had an opinion, they must at some time be reduced to one opin-
ion— why not commence, then, the discussion this afternoon?
Take up the judiciary — it may be the first question; take up the
legislative department, that may be the first question. Let us
get an opinion on any one of these subjects. Take either of them
up and discuss it, and then pass on to the others, and until in this
way we ascertain the sense of the Convention upon them all, and
the work will be done.

Mr. BROCKMAN was glad to see the desire of gentlemen to
get on with the work of the Convention. The best way of serving
their constituents was to be doing the work they had been sent
there to perform. There were three leading questions upon which
they would be called to act — the executive, legislative and judici-
ary departments of the State — upon either of which we might
have an immediate discussion. Every delegate had an idea of a
constitution in his mind, and of what it should be. By commenc-
ing the discussion now we niight get through the labors of this
Convention in six weeks; but if we get along only as we have done

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847 59

we would not get through in six months. Let us get up those
resolutions, and then perform our duty by discussing them, which
is certainly no more than we owe to our constituents. He felt that
this was his duty as he had sat there in his place and saw the time
wasted away unprofitably. There was time enough left, and he
hoped it would be occupied in a proper way.]"

Mr. BALLINGALL hoped the motion to print would be
adopted. They could be printed by tomorrow forenoon, and the
time between now and Monday would be little enough for the
President to appoint the standing committees.

Mr. MINSHALL was in favor of going on now. There are
no committees appointed yet, and we have nothing to do. Let us
get at the sense of the Convention upon some of these points, and
then the committees will have nothing to do but carry out our
views. We all understand what the constitution should be; there
is no delegate present but does, or is presumed to, know what the
general features of the constitution should be. He earnestly
hoped the Convention would go on with the discussion.

Mr. ROUNTREE thought the motion was very unnecessary.
We had passed a resolution to print the constitution, which we
would soon have before us on our desks. There were five days
already wasted, and we have done nothing. Let us have a starting
point; and if we would but commence to hear the views of gentle-
men on any of the questions before us, we would have done much.
He was in favor of the proposition of the gentleman from Stark.

Mr. WILLIAMS. It is very well to have the old constitution
printed, but no delegate would suppose that we are to take it up,
and do no more than to add to and strike from it.

He thought Monday next a good day to commence the work
in earnest. Let us have good feeling among the members — no
crimination nor recrimination about what is passed, nor about
what has been said by any of the members. He could see no
reason for it. Let them do the work for which they had come
there, and that, too, methodically; and if they went to work thus,
in the second week, no one could complain. We thus could do

"These speeches by Logan, Davis, and Brockman, were omitted from
the tri-weekly Illinois State Register, but printed in the weekly of June 18.

6o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the work in a shorter time than in any other way. — The delay of
one day was not much; and then take it up, and go to work in
good temper until it was done.

Mr. WHITNEY liked the feeling that had been displayed by
gentlemen to expedite the business of the Convention. But he
did not think they could expedite matters much by commencing
this evening. If we had these resolutions printed and before us,
we could then understand, by reading them and examining the
language ourselves, better than if we had only heard them read
from the secretary's table. We cannot get through the discussion
of these questions in a few days, nor, perhaps, in a few weeks.

Mr. HARVEY moved a division of the questions to print and
lay on the table.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond was not opposed to the mere motion of
printing these resolutions, but in them were not contained all the
questions which would come before the Convention. They con-
tained propositions relative to the judiciary and Legislature, but
the questions of banks, the right of suffrage, the naturalization
law, were not contained in the resolutions. There was a large
number of resolutions on the table, and to-day we print these
two resolutions, and to-morrow other gentlemen will call up their
resolutions, involving questions upon every subject, and then will
come motions to have them printed also.

Mr. KITCHELL said, that the great difficulty in the progress
of business appeared to him to be in the presentation of too many
questions for discussion at one time. Here was a series of resolu-
tions, with a long preamble, partaking of the character of a speech,
and members could not be expected to discuss or vote upon
propositions in such a shape. A naked question only should be
presented. Let it be the abolition of the Council of Revision.
There was hardly a member but was prepared both to vote on,
and discuss that proposition; and then so on with others. Let
the questions be put nakedly to the Convention, and the members
were prepared to meet them. Let them be presented with the
question of altering the mode of appointing the judiciary, and the
various other questions, singly, and they will be prepared for them.

Mr. LOGAN concurred with the gentleman last up, and had
drawn up something which would present to the Convention a

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847 61

single point, something tangible, which they could all understand.
It was a proposition to amend the resolutions of the gentleman
from Greene.

The CHAIR ruled the amendment out of order, while a motion
to print and lay on the table was pending.

Mr. Z. CASEY desired to make a single suggestion. Would
it not facilitate the matter to refer the whole resolutions to the
committee of the whole, and make them the order of the day for
to-morrow? Let all the resolutions that had been offered be
referred to the committee, and then make something out of the
whole of them if you can. When the committee had got them
into shape, let that report be printed. He would not make the
motion, but merely the suggestion to the Convention.

Mr. ARCHER could not vote upon important principles set
forth in a series of resolutions without having had time for reflec-
tion and examination. He did not desire to vote upon subjects
which he might, upon reflection, have wished he had not done.
We had a most important duty to perform. We were making
laws for ages to come. He had heard the resolutions read once
at the secretary's table, and could form but a general opinion of
them; he only recollected part of them. He desired to postpone
the discussion of them until they could examine them. He
agreed that we should work with good feeling. We should cast
no reflection upon gentlemen who might have offered a resolution
or anything else in the Convention. All were anxious to perform
the duty that had been assigned them by their constituents; and
he could not believe that anyone had offered a resolution here for
the purpose of killing time. He felt that he had a duty incumbent
on him to go at once to the business of this Convention. In view
that he might understandingly assume the responsibility of voting
on the propositions, he thought that he should have time for
examination. He agreed that they should vote on every proposi-
tion singly.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin. The proposition now before
them was to debate a certain series of resolutions containing several
propositions offered by the gentleman from Greene. It was very
proper for those who agreed with the views contained in those
resolutions to desire their discussion. But other gentlemen had

62 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

presented a class of resolutions of antagonist character in principle.
The discussion should be so comprehensive as to include a debate
upon propositions of both sides. We ought to have them all
before us, and, after a full discussion of them all, select such views
as are best from the variety before us. We ought to have the
most light we can. What advantage would it be to discuss a
proposition containing but one view of a question, unless at the
same time we had the antagonist principle set forth in the same
shape ?

To discuss the question, how many members the Senate and
House of Representatives should contain, what need have we of
having any printing done? He hoped that if any were printed,
the Convention would have them all before them.

Mr. LOGAN said that, if there were any gentlemen ready to
discuss any other questions, there could be no propriety in de-
laying. He had sent to the Chair an amendment to the resolu-
tions of the gentleman from Greene, which presented a single
point. The resolutions of the gentleman provided that the
judges should be elected and hold their office for six years. His
amendment proposed that they should be elected one for four
years, one for eight, and one for twelve years, having a change
every four years, but to have the term finally at twelve years.
This amendment would present the question, and to his view, and
in his estimation, a very great question, whether the judges of
the supreme court should be elected at different times
or all at once. He thought these matters might be discussed
at once.

Mr. WILLIAMS then withdrew his motion to lay on the table.

Mr. THOMAS suggested a reference of the whole matter to
the committee of the whole, as there these questions might be
discussed singly. He suggested this plan of operation to gentle-
men, as there seemed to be a disposition to act now. He moved
a reference of the resolutions and amendment to the committee of
the whole; which was agreed to.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the
whole — Mr. Sherman in the chair.

Mr. BALLINGALL wished to inquire of the gentleman from
Greene, what he meant by the words in the resolution, "that

FRIDAY, JUNE ii, 1847 63

neither of them could, without the consent and co-operation of
at least one of the others, injuriously affect either of the great
rights of personal liberty and private property."

Mr. NORTON said, he had been in favor of laying the resolu-
tions on the table and printing them, to enable members to under-
stand them correctly. One person would understand them one
way, and one another.

Mr. HARVEY moved to strike out the sentence.

Mr. WOODSON said, he would explain the meaning. Suppose
the Legislature should pass a law to hang a man without a trial by
his peers — without the approbation of any tribunal. Is it possible
that any law should be recognized as a law until passed upon by
the judiciary?

The Legislature can pass no law affecting life or liberty with-
out the co-operation of a co-ordinate branch of the government.

Mr. WILLL'^MS explained further, by saying that the Legis-
lature might pass a law that a man should be hung without trial,
and send a committee out to execute it; they are precluded from
so doing by this provision. — They pass laws affecting the rights of
private individuals, and this provision is introduced to prevent
an abuse of that power. Why distribute the power of government
into several branches ? Because one branch of the civil magistrates
may become corrupt, and there should be some provision in case
that, if one branch should become corrupt, the other should
control it.

Mr. DAVIS of Bond. The gentleman from Greene says, in
the proposition before us, that no one power can affect life or
liberty without the co-operation of another. He does not say
which one. Suppose the Legislature did pass a law to hang a man
without a trial by his peers, and that it should obtain the co-
operation of the Governor, that would be another branch of the
government — but not the right one, I should think!

Mr. Z. CASEY would suggest to the gentleman from Greene
that his proposition did not materially amend the constitution.
It would appear, said he, that that article of the constitution
is not essentially amended by the proposition of the gentleman.
In his mind, they, should not attempt to amend the constitution
unless they obviously did amend it. The old constitution, as he

64 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

had hinted before, was, in many parts, better than any thing new
they could adopt. We had better let it alone unless we did
materially amend it.

Mr. WOODSON. If the proposition does hot materially
affect the constitution, there can be no harm in it; nothing objec-
tionable— nothing to fear in it, if it contains essentially what is in
the constitution. It is only declaring our opinion that what was
in the old should be in the new.

Mr. BALLINGALL moved that the committee rise and report
that they had had certain resolutions under consideration, had
made no progress therein, and ask leave to sit again.

The PRESIDENT took the chair, and the chairman of the
committee so reported. Several members then rose, and declared
that it was not their understanding of the report that was to be
made. The chairman was allowed to amend his report.

On motion, the Convention adjourned till Monday next, at
9 o'clock, A. M.

VI. MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1847

i-ayer by the Rev. Mr. Palmer.'^

Messrs. Gregg, of Cook and Lasater, of Hamilton appeared,
were qualified and took their seats.

The president announced the standing committees of the
Convention; which are as follows:

Executive Department — Messrs. Lockwood, Rountree, Vance,
Manly, Swan, Sharp, Huston, Evey, Worcester, Hay and Frick.

Judiciary — Messrs. Scates, Logan, Henderson, Ballingall,
Hoes, Harlan, Farwell, Minshall, Wead, Davis of Massac, and
Hurlbut.

Legislative Department — Messrs. Dement, Williams, Dale,
Constable, Thompson, Zadoc Casey, Witt, Servant, Marshall of
Mason, Peters, Judd, Rives, Pace, Powers, and Heacock.

Bill of Rights — Messrs. Caldwell, Grimshaw, Cross of Winne-
bago, Trower, Webber, Knapp of Jersey, Sim, Carter, Atherton,
and Hunsaker.

Incorporations — Messrs. Harvey, Dummer, Bosbyshell, Ed-
monson, Green of Tazewell, Anderson, Kinney of St. Clair, Allen,
Whitney, Spencer, and Lasater.

Revenue — Messrs. Zadoc Casey, Thomas, Green of Clay, Knox,
Laughlin, Palmer of Marshall, Stadden, McClure, Eccles, Jones,
and Vernor.

Elections and Right of Suffrage — Messrs. Davis of Massac,
Green of Jo Daviess, Marshall of Coles, Brown, Geddes, Ballingall,
Hawley, Armstrong, McCallen, Oliver, and Knowlton.

Finance — Messrs. Sherman, Davis of Montgomery, Hogue,
Archer, Robbins, Dunlap, Blakely, Brockman, Pratt, Mieure,
Harper, Roman, Hatch, Adams, and West.

Education — Messrs. Campbell of Jo Daviess, Edwards of Madi-
son, Shumway, Smith of Gallatin, Palmer of Macoupin, Pinckney,

"^Tliis was apparently Henry D. Palmer, delegate from Marshall County.
' ' He has frequently been called upon,to serve as chaplain. ' ' Chicago Democrat,
August 17, 1847, Springfield correspondence of August 10. See biography in
appendix.

\
\

66 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS \

Matheny, Choate, Harding, Churchill, Turner, Tutt, Robynsoih,
and Shields.

Organization of Departments, and Officers connected with I'he
Executive Department — Messrs. Archer, Gregg, Edwards of San-
gamon, Miller, McCully, Lander, McCallen, Church, Aktr,
Loudon, Kinney of Bureau, Sibley, Kenner, and Moffett.

Division of the State into Counties and their Organization —
Messrs. Jenkins, Lasater, Blair, Markley, Simpson, Graham,
Mason, Cross of Woodford, Turnbull, Canady, and Hill.

Militia and Military Affairs — Messrs. Whiteside, Morris,-
James, McHatton, Deitz, Holmes, Kreider, Huston, Tuttle, Smith
of Macon, Dawson, Moore, and Jackson.

Revision and adjustment of the articles of the Constitutio)i
adopted by this Convention and to provide for the alteration and
amendment of the same — Messrs. Edwards of Madison, Scates,
Logan, Allen, Knowlton, Butler, Singleton, Holmes, Caldwell,
Norton, Farwell, Gregg, Woodson, and Thomas.

Miscellaneous Subjects and Questions — Messrs. Crain, Bunsen,
Campbell of McDonough, F. S. Casey, Colby, Cross of Woodford,
Dunn, Dunsmore, Lemon, Lenley, Nichols, Smith of Macon, and
Northcott.

Law Reform — Messrs. Hayes, Knapp of Scott, Woodson,
Thornton, Kitchell, Davis of McLean, Bond, Norton, Thomas,
Kinney of St. Clair, and Edwards of Sangamon.

[Mr. CALDWELL requested to be excused from service on
the committee on the Bill of Rights; which was granted.]'^

Mr. DEMENT moved that 200 copies of the rules be printed.
Carried.

The president laid before the Convention a communication
from the Secretary of State, on the subject of common schools.
Laid on the table.

Mr. SHUMWAY introduced a resolution containing the
following propositions:

I. That the new constitution shall prohibit the Legislature
from imposing, continuing or reviving a tax— creating a debt —
making, continuing or reviving any appropriation of money or
property; or which releases, discharges or commutes any claim of

"Added from the weekly Illinois State Register, June IS.

MONDAY, JUm 14, 1847 67

the State except by yeas.-andmnys, duly entered on the journals;
and three-fifths of eidwt Hnise shall be necessary to constitute
a quorum upon the Vf^ffgUgif such acts.

2. That no a|p||||(«pRon shall be paid out of the State
treasury, except iMWP<ii^<^^ of 1^^> ^""^ within a certain period
after its enactmehttv -

3. That the Legislature shall not grant extra pay to any
public agent after such public service shall have been performed,
or contract entefCd into for the performance of the same;

4. .^Widsiuillalso have power to make deductions from salaries
of public-oiJiocsrt, who neglect the performance of any public duty
assignetl"«tlieiii by law. Referred to committee on Legislative
Department.

^fr. DEMENT offered the following resolution:

ResoketU That the order of proceeding in the amendment,
revision or alteration of the present constitution of this State,
shall he the reading of the articles and sections thereof, in their
order, and referring them, together with such amending proposi-
tions as may seem expedient, to appropriate committees, for their
consideration.

Mr. D. said, that this resolution, or one similar to it, should
be adopted in order to establish, as early as practicable, some
system by which the business of the Convention could be expedited.

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to strike out all after the word
"resolved" and insert various amendments to the constitution.

Mr. ROBBINS was in favor of the resolution of the gentleman
from Lee (Mr. Dement.) He thought that if every member
should at once present all his views upon every subject embraced
in and connected with the constitution, it would take several
months to get through. He thought the original resolution was
calculated to establish a systematic mode of procedure. He
moved to lay the amendment on the table. Agreed to.

Mr. PALMER supported the resolution. He was for estab-
lishing order. Without it they could not proceed with dispatch
in the business for which they had been called together. Order
was the first law of nature. He thought that the submission to
the consideration of the Convention, of skeleton constitutions
embracing every subject, was calculated to delay action. The

68 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

multiplicity of ideas and propositions, thus presented, would
keep them here, they do not know how long.

Mr. KINNEY offered a substitute to the resolution, the
substance of which was as follows : — That so much of the constitu-
tion as relates to the executive, the judiqary, and legislative
departments, be referred to the committees on those subjects, and
so also, in regard to questions of finance, education, elections,
corporations, &c., each subject being referred to its appropriate
committee. — He also embodied in his resolution, instructions to
the committee on incorporations, to report against the creation
of banks in this State, and that no corporation be ^^mitted to
issue paper money, and that the property of members bf corpora-
tions be made liable for the debts of such corporations;-"' !*'V

Mr. ROUNTREE offered a substitute to Mr. K.'s substif fte,
and differing from it only in leaving out the instructions. ■■"

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, advocated Mr. Demeht's
resolution.

Mr. ROUNTREE spoke in favor of his own substitute.

The discussion was continued by Messrs. Kinney of Bureau,
KiTCHELL, Davis of Bond, Dement and Henry.

Mr. GEDDES also participated in the debate, and moved to
lay the substitute on the table.

Mr. Z. CASEY suggested that the two substitutes be
withdrawn by the gentleman who offered them; which they agreed
to.

The resolution offered by Mr. Dement was further discussed
by Messrs. Thomas, Logan, Dement, and Rountree, when the
Convention

Adjourned till two o'clock.

afternoon

The Convention took up the resolution of Mr. Dement, which
was under consideration at the time of adjournment.

Mr. DEMENT stated that he had modified the resolution
which was pending at the adjournment so as to read as follows:

Resolved, That in Convention the order of proceeding in the
amendment, revision, or alteration of the present constitution of
this State shall be, to take it up and read, in their order, the

MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1847 69

articles and sections thereof, and referring the amending proposi-
tions to appropriate committees for their consideration.

Mr. ROUNTREE then moved the amendment submitted by
him in the forenoon to the original resolution offered by Mr.
Dement; which was accepted by Mr. D.

Mr. SHUMWAY offered a substitute to the resolution; which
was rejected.

The question then recurring on Mr. Dement's resolution, it
was adopted.

Mr. WOODSON offered a resolution that when a committee
submits a report, it shall be taken up and disposed of before any
other business. Adopted.

Mr. MARKLEY offered the following resolution :

Resolved, That the committee on Incorporations be, and they
are hereby, instructed to report an amendment to the constitution
prohibiting, forever, within this State, the incorporation of any
bank or company for banking purposes, and the manufacture and
emission, by any company, copartnership or individual, of any
bank note, or other paper designed to be circulated as paper money.

Mr. PRATT offered the following substitute to Mr. M.'s
resolution:

Resolved, That the standing committee on Incorporations be
instructed to inquire into the expediency of reporting the following
provisions, to be adopted in the amended constitution:

I. There shall be no bank of issue or discount within this
State.

a. The Legislature shall not have power to authorize or
incorporate, by any general or special law, any bank or other
institution having any banking power or privilege, or to confer
upon any corporation, institution, person or persons, any banking
power or privilege.

3. It shall not be lawful for any corporation, institution,
person or persons, within this State, under any pretense or author-
ity, to make or issue any paper money, note, bill, certificate, or
other evidence of debt whatever, intended to circulate as money.

4. It shall not be lawful for any corporation within this
State, under any pretense or authority, to exercise the business
of receiving deposits of money, making discounts, or buying or

70 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

selling bills of exchange, or to do any other banking business
whatever.

5. No branch or agency of any bank or banking institution
of the United States, or of any State or Territory within or without
the United States, shall be established or maintained within this
State.

6. It shall not be lawful to circulate within this State, after
the year 1848, any paper money, note, bill, certificate, or other
evidence of debt whatever, intended to circulate as money, issued
without this State, of any denomination less than $10, or after
the year 1850, of any denomination less than SS20.

7. All payments made, or business done, in paper money in
this State, and coming within the meaning of the last section, are
declared utterly void; and the Legislature shall, at its first session,
after the adoption of these amendments, and from time to time
thereafter as it may be necessary, enact adequate remedies for
the punishment of all violations and evasions of the provisions
of the preceding section.

The PRESIDENT stated that the presentation of these last
two propositions was premature, they being inhibited by the
adoption of Mr. Dement's resolution.

Mr. MINSHALL moved to suspend the rule for to-day; which
was done, when

Mr. MARKLEY again offered his resolution on the subjects
of banks, and

Mr. PRATT also offered his on the same subject.

Mr. THOMAS moved to refer both to the committee on
Incorporations. Carried.

Mr. offered a resolution to abolish the council

of Revision. Carried.

Mr. EDMONSON offered a resolution concerning revenue.
Adopted.

Mr. DAWSON offered a resolution, that pleasure carriages,
watches, &c., be taxed, and the proceeds added to the school fund,
which, after being amended, so as to make fines and forfeitures as
a part of the School Fund, was adopted.

Mr. DAWSON ofi^ered [a] resolution, that the office of public
printer be abolished. Referred to the committee on Finance.

MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1847 71

Mr. ARCHER offered a resolution, that the Executive
committee inquire into the expediency of limiting the authority
of the Governor to pardon criminals; which was adopted. He
also offered a resolution that the legislative committee inquire
into the expediency of prohibiting the State to borrow, unless the
bill for such purpose shall have first been submitted to the people,
except in cases of extreme emergency, and then loans only to a
limited amount may be borrowed.

Mr. DEMENT offered a resolution, that an article be incor-
porated in the constitution, limiting the Legislature to one
hundred members — thirty senators, and seventy representatives.

Mr. CASEY moved to strike out all after the word "resolved,"
and insert a provision that there shall be sixty members — forty
in the House and twenty in the Senate, elected for two years,
sessions not to exceed sixty days — pay of members two dollars per
day.

Mr. EDMONSON moved to amend, so as to provide for a
biennial session of the Legislature — sessions to hold not exceeding
sixty days, both branches to consist of one hundred members —
pay two dollars a day for coming, attending and returning.
Referred to the committee on the Legislative Department.

Mr. WOODSON offered as a provision in the constitution,
that each male inhabitant, over twenty-one years of age, pay a
capitation tax of one dollar, to be applied in payment of the
State debt. Referred to the Revenue committee.

Mr. SHUMWAY offered a resolution, that the Judicial com-
mittee inquire into the expediency of providing by the constitution,
that no judge of the circuit or supreme court shall be elected
during his term of office, to any office of honor, trust and profit,
except in the case of a circuit judge who may be elected to the
supreme bench — an offer to be a candidate to be regarded as a
voluntary resignation of office.

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, offered a resolution, that the
Judiciary committee inquire into the expediency of amending the
constitution so as to provide that sheriffs shall not be elected for
a longer term than three years, and they shall not be eligible for a
second consecutive term; that the officer \sic\ of Lieutenant

72 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Governor be abolished, and that an additional secretary be
appointed to report the debates of this Convention.

Mr. WEAD moved to amend so as to abolish the office of
Attorney General. He said that he thought that office was
unnecessary. If the State should be divided in judicial districts,
requiring the supreme court to be held in each, the district
attorneys could perform the same duties. He knew of no reason
why the Attorney General should enjoy a higher dignity than
other prosecuting attorneys. That officer had the same duties to
perform and but few more. Amendment agreed to.

The question recurring upon Mr. C's resolutions.

Mr. SINGLETON said, that he regarded the proposition to
appoint an assistant to report the conventional debates, as a most
important one. He had heard remarks in regard to the expense
of publishing these debates. Wishing, as much as any member,
to avoid expense, he would not carry economy so far as to with-
hold his support from a measure, which had for its object the
enlightenment of the people in regard to our action in this body,
and the provisions of the constitution which are to be submitted
to them for ratification or rejection. By a report of our debates,
said Mr. S., the people may learn something in relation to the
motives by which we were influenced, and the ends we wish to
accomplish in framing the organic law upon which they are
to pass a final judgment. The volume will, it is true, contain a
condensed, and perhaps a crude, report of our doings; yet it
cannot fail to enlighten the people, and he believed that the
people would consider the cost of the publication well repaid by
the information they would gain by it. He knew not, neither did
he care, what it might cost; he believed that it would not be more
than their constituents would be willing to pay. He thought that
opposition to it grew out of a penny saving policy and mere
practical retrenchment, which it was not the duty of the Conven-
tion to engage in. We have come here, said he, to unfold and
apply new principles of government; and he desired to submit
those principles to the people with all the light possible. He cared
but little how it should be done, whether by the body itself or by
the contribution of members. He was willing to pay for reporting
and printing. He would by all means do so if it was to be done

MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1847 13

for the benefit of members; but he did not so regard it. It was
for the benefit of the people that he urged its adoption.

Mr. PALMER, of Marshall, could see no necessity for publish-
ing an official report of the debates. There were gentlemen
present, whose business was, as he understood, to report for the
papers the speeches of members, and they would give all the
important debates; the public can, from these, obtain all the in-
formation desirable in relation to our proceedings. These,
besides being published in the papers here, will be copied in other
papers, and obtain a wide circulation. Thus it is apparent, that
for us to publish them, would be incurring a useless expense. He
knew that the congressional debates were sometimes published,
but such a proposition was unheard of in Illinois. In our present
pecuniary embarrassment, as a State, he regarded it as highly
improper. It would be showing liberality before justice. Our
debt is heavy: it will cost something to publish these debates, and
by not doing it, we may save a little, at least. The globe is
composed of particles, and our State debt is composed of dollars
and cents. In the estimation of many, the odium of virtual
repudiation rests upon us, which it is our duty to remove before
we indulge in undue extravagance. Though we have but little
or nothing to show for this debt, we still owe it; and before he
left the stage of action, he wished to see some measures taken for
its liquidation. In this view of things, he was unprepared to
support the resolutions.

Mr. KINNEY moved to amend the resolution so as to require
members to pay for reporting their speeches; each member to pay
in proportion to the number and length of his speeches. (Laughter.)

Mr. K. made a few remarks, which, owing to confusion near
the reporter, was [sic] not distinctly heard by him.

Mr. WEAD was anxious to have the debates published.
Allusion had been made to taxes. He thought that the expense
of publishing these debates would not affect the payment of the
public debt. A mill and a half on the dollar had been appro-
priated for that object, and the appropriation for this will not
diminish that amount. The only question is, whether it is a
proper object, and whether the people will be willing to pay a
reporter. He desired to have the costs estimated by a committee.

74 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

It has been said that the debate will be published in the news-
papers. He had no expectation that they would be published in
the newspapers; and if they should be, members would hardly
recognize them as their own. He desired to have them published
officially, so that they might be transmitted to posterity in a
reliable form. He scarcely knew of a Convention that had not
published debates. It was, at the present day, the uniform
practice. He regretted that the debates of the Conventions of
other States were not accessible to the members of this Convention.
They would be most serviceable in affording light and information
to guide them in their deliberations. The people desire informa-
tion in regard to the action of this Convention. Will it be pre-
tended that they will be competent to judge without light? He
who denies information will do them a wrong. It is a mistake to
suppose that the people will not be willing to pay for it. They
will not forego it for the sake of saving money, and he hoped it
would be furnished in an authoritative form. The newspapers
will not give it in an authentic shape. Every newspaper reporter
is more or less influenced by political feelings and party bias, and
if disposed to report erroneously, we have not the power to
correct their misrepresentations. For these reasons he desired
that an official reporter should be appointed, whom they could
control. The expense will be but little. He had been informed
that a reporter could be hired for the pay of a secretary, and the
debates could be printed by the public printers.

Mr. MINSHALL said, that he had never directed his attention
particularly to the subject, but on referring to the law he had
ascertained that the Convention had not the power to appoint an
official reporter. It is true that gentlemen have adopted a
different name for such an office, but he considered it but an
evasion of the law. He thought they ought to be governed by
the letter and spirit of the act of the General Assembly which
provided for the call of the Convention. He concurred with
gentlemen in the importance of having the debates published; but
the Legislature had not authorized it, and they, not us, are re-
sponsible for the omission. We have not, said he, the power to
appropriate money for this purpose, and changing the name from
reporter to secretary will not give it to us.

MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1847 75

Mr. SINGLETON proceeded to reply to Mr. M. He said
that the gentleman was mistaken in his construction of the law.
The secretary's business is to report the proceedings of the Con-
vention, and this body may appoint another secretary to report
the speeches, which, in fact, form a portion of the proceedings.
He did not regard it as an evasion of the law; but — [Here the
president called him to order, stating that under the rules, no
member could speak twice to the same question when other mem-
bers desired to speak.]

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, said, he would avail himself of the
opportunity afforded him by the discussion on the resolutions now
before the Convention, to express his views in relation to the
election of an official reporter of the debates of this body, to
correct a misreport of the remarks which he had the honor to
submit to this assembly a few days since, on the resolution then
pending, which had for its end, in part, the definition of the
objects for which the Convention was called, and the extent of
its powers.

I think, sir, (said Mr. D.) that the debates of this Convention
ought to be published and preserved for the use and benefit of the
people of the State, and I am, therefore, willing to see a competent
gentleman selected for the purpose, with reasonable compensation
for his services, to be paid out of the State treasury, in pursuance
of law; or, if gentlemen can be induced to do so, to be paid by the
members themselves, out of their per diem allowance. The
reasons for the publication of these debates are so numerous and
weighty, and have been so fully stated by gentlemen who have
preceded me, that I shall not attempt to adduce any in addition,
or to urge by other arguments those which have already been
submitted to the Convention, concluding, as I do, that enough
has been said by others to convince the members of the great
importance of the report and publication.

It was remarked by the member from Fulton, that the pub-
lished reports of the speeches of members of this body, as found in
the newspapers of this city, are very inaccurate and faulty, which
must be the case while the reports continue to be taken down and
published unofficially. I can myself bear testimony to the
correctness of this statement; for, sir, in the report of the remarks

76 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

which I had the honor to deliver to the Convention the other day,
on the resolution before alluded to, I am misrepresented in a very-
important particular. In that report I am made to say that "the
act providing for the call of this Convention was both constitu-
tional and proper." This I did not say, sir, but, on the contrary,
I remarked, that I had opposed the act on constitutional grounds
while it was before the Senate, of which body I was an humble
member at the time of the passage of the law. I argued, however,
that the Legislature possessed plenary power to make the appro-
priations which they did make to pay the members of the Conven-
tion, and the officers connected with it, and that it was highly
proper to do so. I said, further, that this was a constitutional
Convention, brought together in pursuance of the 7th article of
the constitution, and, as such, limited within certain boundaries
and to certain objects specified in the said 7th article."

I said, sir, that the people were not here in their primary
original capacity, but in the persons of their delegates, chosen
under the constitution and in pursuance of its provisions.

I hold it to be a fundamental axium [sic] in political science,
that the people, as such, have a right to abolish government, and
institute new forms for their better security and greater happiness.
This is what I said, sir.

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, said, that he supposed when
he offered the resolution under discussion, that its importance
would be apparent to all, but he had discovered that, when any
matter of this kind is proposed, the question of cost and expense
is at once raised and so strongly urged as to render success almost
hopeless. Now, sir, it is hard to believe that there is a member on
this floor who does not appreciate the importance of employing
an official reporter. Are not the debates of the constitutional
conventions of other States eagerly sought after? They are, sir,
and it is a matter of regret that we have not within our reach the
debates that have taken place in similar conventions in our sister
States, to aid and enlighten us — to suggest modes of procedure,
forms, &c. If we seek the debates of the conventions of other
States, will not ours also be sought for? The constitution that
we are to adopt, will be presented to the people for their ratifica-

"Seea«/e, 19.

MONBAY, JUNE 14, 1847 77

tion or rejection, and it is due to them, that the motives and in-
fluences that have entered into its adoption by us, should go forth
with it, to aid the people in forming an opinion in regard to its
merits and value. Let them have the same light and the same
means of forming their judgment that we have. If we do not
appoint a reporter, they cannot know — they will have no means of
ascertaining— the motives or influences which gave birth to the
constitution we present to them. We cannot expect the public
prints to give a full report of the debates which take place in this
body. They have not room for them in their columns, and if
they had, they would give no more than they choose. They are
irresponsible and beyond our control. It is desirable that we
have a reporter, to whose reports full faith and credit can be given,
and if any member should be misrepresented he can have a remedy.
Gentlemen have said that they have been mis-reported. Adopt
this resolution and the evil they complain of will be obviated.
We have no right to expect the public prints to be perfectly accu-
rate. They do not feel that responsibility which would be felt by
an official reporter, and if we wish for an authentic record of what
is said here, we must make provision for it.

Now, sir, a word in regard to the pay of the proposed officer.
In framing the resolution, I used the term "secretary" instead of
"reporter." We have a secretary to record our proceedings. Is
there anything in the law of the Legislature prohibiting us to
employ a secretary to record the speeches. They are as much a
part of our proceedings as those acts which are generally distin-
guished by the term "proceedings." A large majority of the
people elected this Convention to alter and amend the constitu-
tion; they solemnly declared that a revision was necessary, and
appointed us to do the work. Did they not, I ask, as solemnly
declare, that all the expenses attending it should be paid by the
State? Did they not give us a virtual pledge, that they would
pay the cost of carrying out the purposes of this Convention ? Let
these debates go out to the people along with the constitution.
Of what service would the debates of the Convention of 1818 not
be to us now? Who will say that the published debates of this
Convention would not, in after times, be regarded as invaluable
in explaining clauses, sentences and articles which may be of

78 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

doubtful construction? This consideration alone is sufficient to
recommend this resolution to the favor of the Convention.

He was willing to vote for the amendment of the gentleman
from St. Clair (Mr. Kinney) if gentlemen were so much afraid to
take money out of the treasury. He would himself contribute to
have the debates printed, rather than have the project fail. He,
however, thought that there was too much of retrenchment
in the proposition for its supporters to vote for it themselves. He
concluded by moving to lay Mr. Kinney's amendment on the
table.

Mr. KNOWLTON wanted to have a reporter elected, but he
must take occasion to say that he loved consistency. Gentlemen
were on one side for one purpose and on another for another.
The other day gentlemen said we had no power beyond what the
strict letter of the law had given us; now, they say we have power
beyond that letter. He did not agree with them then, and he
was glad to see them on his side now; but he hoped they would
remain where they had got and be more consistent hereafter.
We have come here for the purpose of being consistent — to send
out a consistent document, free from party taint or bias.

Gentlemen called the proposed officer a secretary, to secure
his pay to him. He did not like anything indirect — liked to hear
things called by their right names. He should vote for the officer
because he believed the Convention had the power to elect him.

Gentlemen had complained of being reported incorrectly. He
had never noticed any misrepresentations, and he thought they
were well enough reported. Great men are always complaining
of being reported incorrectly. He had heard the same complaint
from his boyhood. David Crockett said that he came near being
ruined by the reporters.

Mr. HAYES made an animated speech in favor of employing
a reporter, to be paid by an appropriation by the next Legislature.
He thought the Convention had no power to create such an officer
and draw money to pay him out of the treasury. The lateness of
the hour compels us to condense Mr. H.'s remarks.

Mr. WEAD explained that he did not intend to accuse the
reporters on the floor with intentionally misrepresenting members.
He was aware that the duty was arduous — that they could give

MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1847 79

no more than a synopsis of speeches. He had noticed that
the reports of the different papers did not agree, and this was
the reason why an official reporter was required. He was willing
to pay for it.

Mr. SCATES said that it was his opinion that the Convention
had not the power to make the treasury liable for the expense of
employing a reporter. Allusion had been made to other States.
So far as his information went, the debates in other States were
published by private enterprise. We have reasons for economy;
and he could not support the proposition.

Mr. PETERS remarked to Mr. Scates, that the Missouri
Convention had employed a reporter, and recommended the
Legislature to pay him.

Mr. SCATES. The gentleman is unfortunate in his example,
for the acts of the Convention were rejected by the people —
constitution and all.

Mr. ROBBINS said, he could not vote for the proposition
before the Convention. It asks this body to employ an additional
secretary, to report the debates of the Convention, the speeches
of the delegates, and that, sir, at the expense of the State.

The law calling this Convention gives it no such power. It
authorizes the employment of such secretaries as are necessary in
the transaction of its legitimate business, and for no other pur-
poses. Now, if the speeches of the delegates in this hall are
the business transactions of this body, it is the duty of the secre-
taries now employed to record them as such, in the journals of the
Convention. If they are not the business of this body, it has no
right to publish them, in any manner, at the expense of the State.
But, why do gentlemen wish to publish these speeches? For
whose good? They have told us it is for the good of the people
of this State — to illuminate their minds, to enlighten them in the
great principles that agitate this body, to acquaint them with the
reasons that induce this Convention to propose the alterations
and amendments they are going to offer to the people for their
rejection or ratification, and thus produce a harmony in action of
the convention and the vote of the people; and that otherwise the
people would not approve of the amendments about to be offered

8o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

by this body. If this was all true, sir, it is impossible for the
speeches to be reported, printed, bound, and circulated among the
people in time to do any good. There is no probability that
the Convention will be able to finish their business in time to
present the alterations and amendments of the Constitution be-
fore the first Monday in August next, and the law requires that the
people shall vote for or against the amendments proposed, on
the fourth Monday in October following. The labor of getting
up such a book would be immense. I hold in my hand, sir, the
reported debates of the North Carolina Convention of 1835.
That Convention met on the 5th day of June, and adjourned on
the loth day of the following month — not in session more than
five weeks, and restricted, by law, to only nine propositions; and
yet, sir, these debates make a volume of more than four hundred
pages. Taking this for an example, what a volume would the
speeches of this Convention make, in a session of at least two
months, and with a range covering the whole Constitution of
Illinois. Sir, it would be impossible to get up such a book, and
to get it before the people, before the fourth Monday of October,
the time required for the people to vote for or against the amend-
ments. Besides, the expense would be entirely too great for the
people to bear, in their present embarrassed circumstances.
Nor do I think, sir, that these speeches would illuminate and edify
the people as much as gentlemen seem to think they would. I
have heard no better propositions on this floor for altering and
amending the constitution, and no better arguments offered in
support of those propositions, than I heard in the circle of my
neighbors before I left home — in the workshop, in the store, in
the groups of laborers collected to rest themselves in the shade.
Our constituents are not behind us in this matter. They know
how they want their constitution altered. They told us how to
alter it before we came here, and so far as mine are concerned,
they want us, with all reasonable expedition, to make those alter-
ations and then come home.

I am pleased with the gentlemen's speeches. — They have dis-
played much talent and eloquence, and I should be glad to see
them go before the world. But let them go by way of private
enterprise, not at the expense of our impoverished State. But I

MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1847 81

do not think the community would regard them as having been
very efficient in promoting the interests of this Convention. To
show the estimation put on these speeches by the community, I
will relate an anecdote of what happened in an adjoining county a
few weeks since, as a delegate was taking leave of one of his con-
stituents. "How long," said the old farmer, "do you expect to
be gone to the Convention?" "I expect to be home by the first
Monday of August next," was the answer. "How many lawyers
are there in the Convention?" — "About forty," was the answer.
"Forty lawyers in the Convention," said the old man; "then fare-
well, I shall never see you any more!"]'*

Messrs. Singleton, Kitchell and others made a few remarks,
when

Mr. PALMER, of Marshall, moved the indefinite postpone-
ment of the subject, which was agreed to.

The first two propositions of Mr. Campbell were referred to
appropriate committees, and that relating to the reporter only
was postponed.

Adjourned.

'^Robbins' speech in detail has been inserted from the weekly Illinois
State Register, June 18, in place of the tri-weekly's notice that " Mr. Robbins
made a humorous speech against employing a reporter, which we have not
time to give in this day's paper."

VII. TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1847

Mr. FARWELL presented the petition of sundry citizens for a
provision in the constitution providing for the appointment of a
State superintendent of public instruction. Referred to the
Education committee.

Mr. THORNTON presented the petition of sundry citizens
of Shelby county, on various subjects, which was referred to the
committee on Miscellaneous Subjects.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to take up his motion made yesterday,
to re-consider Mr. Dement's resolution in relation to the mode of
proceeding in the business of the Convention. The motion
carried, the vote was re-considered, and the resolution was laid
on the table till the first day of January next.

Mr. JENKINS moved to take up certain resolutions offered
by him some days since, which was agreed to; and the question
being upon referring the resolutions to the appropriate committees,
a debate arose on the best mode of taking up the various proposi-
tions submitted. Mr. Dement thought that the order of business,
as it now existed, would retard the business. Messrs. Brockman,
Davis of McLean, Jenkins, and Loudon, insisted that the rights
of members to bring forward their propositions would be con-
siderably abridged by the mode of proceeding for which Mr.
Dement contended. The previous question was here ordered,
and the resolutions were referred.

Mr. JENKINS moved to take up the resolution offered by him
on the nth inst., which was done, and the resolutions were re-
ferred to the appropriate committees.

Mr. DAVIS, of McLean, offered a resolution that the Judiciary
committee be instructed to inquire into the expediency of organ-
izing the judiciary on a basis, the substance of which is as follows:

A supreme court, composed of three members, having appellate
jurisdiction only, to be chosen in separate districts by the qualified
voters thereof, for nine years, one to be elected every third year:
after the expiration of three terms under such classification, their

TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1847 83

term to be nine years. Salary $1,200. Re-eligible, but incapable
of holding any other office during term and for two years after its
expiration. Clerk to be chosen by voters of State at large, for a
term of three years. The State to be divided into blank number
of circuits — ^judge in each circuit elected by people, for six years.
Salary $1000. To hold no office during term, or two years after
its expiration. Said courts to have probate jurisdiction. Clerks
to be elected by the people for three years, who shall be ex officio
recorders of deeds. Circuit attorneys elected by people in each
circuit. Salary $300. Election of judges to be holden at different
times from the election of State officers.

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, moved to amend, so that the

State may be divided into judicial districts: one

term to be annually held in each. Resolution and amendment
referred to the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. SMITH offered a resolution that the committee on
Revenue be requested to inquire into the expediency of so amending
the constitution as to prohibit the Legislature from pledging the
faith of the State for a larger sum than $50,000, without first
submitting the matter to the people: also, to inquire into the
expediency of locating the seat of government.

Mr. SHUMWAY offered a resolution that the Legislative
committee inquire into the expediency of prohibiting any member
of the Legislature from receiving, during his term, any civil
appointment within the State, or to the Senate of the United
States.

Mr. CHURCH offered a resolution that the committee on the
Bill of Rights be requested to inquire into the expediency of so
amending the 6th article of the constitution, as to provide that
there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in this
State, otherwise than for the punishment of crimes whereof the
party shall have been duly convicted; nor shall any person be
deprived of liberty on account of color.

Mr. KNAPP offered resolutions in substance, that the
Governor shall be invested with the veto power; bills objected to
by him to become laws if a majority subsequently vote for them.
2d Resolution. That committees, when they report, do so in
sectional form, omitting their reasons. 3d Resolution. That the

84 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

committee on Elections be requested to inquire into the expediency
of fixing a different day for the election of judges, from that for
general officers.

The resolutions were divided, and the two first passed. The
last resolution was amended, on motion of Mr. Shumway, so
as to request the Election committee to inquire into the expe-
diency of prohibiting persons from voting who have bets on the
election pending, and passed.

Mr. DAVIS, of Montgomery, offered a resolution that the
committee on Elections inquire into the expediency of so amending
the constitution as to have all voting at elections by ballot.

Mr. HURLBUT moved to amend so as to request the commit-
tee to inquire into the expediency of so altering the 27th section
of article 3, as to require that all electors shall be citizens of the
United States.

Mr. MARSHALL, of Mason, moved to amend so as to strike
out all after the word "resolved," and insert, in substance, that
the committee be instructed to inquire into the expediency of so
amending, as to require voters to have lived in the State twelve
months, and one month next preceding the election: Provided,
that all foreigners in the State at the time the constitution is
adopted shall be considered as electors. Resolution and amend-
ments referred to the committee on Elections.

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, offered a resolution that the com-
mittee on the Bill of Rights be instructed to inquire into the
expediency of reporting an amendment, in substance, that persons
accused of crime, shall be tried in the county or district where the
crime is alleged to have been committed, which county or district
shall have been previously ascertained by law, &c.

Mr. DAWSON offered a resolution that the committee on the
Organization of the Departments of State be instructed to inquire
into the expediency of electing the Governor for three years: mem-
bers of General Assembly to hold but one session of sixty days
during Governor's term, at $1 per day, and $2 for every twenty
miles' travel.

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, moved to strike out two
dollars and insert three. Lost. Resolution adopted.

TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1847 85

Mr. TURNER offered a resolution, that the Legislature
inquire, &c, as to abolishing capital punishment.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to strike out and insert so as to
abolish capital punishment, and take away the pardoning power
from the Governor where the punishment is death under the
present constitution. Referred to committee on Law Reform.

Mr. THORNTON offered a resolution that the committee on
Law Reform be requested to inquire into the expediency of so
amending the constitution, that testimony in courts of equity be
taken in the same manner as in suits at law. Adopted.

Mr. MOFFETT offered a resolution that after the first day
of January, 1849, "o bank bill shall be passed in this State of
a less denomination than twenty dollars, and, in the event of a
bank being established in this State, it shall not issue any bill of
a less denomination than twenty dollars.

Mr. PRATT moved the following substitute:

Resolved, That the committee on Incorporations be instructed
to report such provisions as will effectually prohibit the power of
the Legislature to create or authorize any individuals, company
or corporation, with banking powers in this State.

Resolved, That said committee inquire into and report to the
Convention such provisions as are best calculated gradually to
exclude from, and prohibit the circulation in this State, of bank
bills under the denomination of twenty dollars.

Mr. HURLBUT moved to amend by striking out the word
"resolved," and inserting the following:

"That the committee on Incorporations be instructed to
inquire into the expediency of so amending and altering the 2ist
section of article 8 of the constitution, as to provide for a system
of general banking laws, similar in principle with the propositions
lately adopted in the State of New York."

Mr. MARKLEY moved to lay the amendment ofMr. Hurlbut
on the table.

Mr. DAVIS, of McLean, called for the yeas and nays.

Mr. MARKLEY modified his motion so as to lay on the table
to a day certain.

Mr. DAVIS, of Bond, said that the amendment was a resolu-
tion of inquiry and that he should not vote against a resolution of

86 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

inquiry. When the question as to creating banks in this State
should arise, he would vote for a provision prohibiting them. He
hoped the amendment would go to the committee.

Mr. BALLINGALL said that it could not be concealed that
there was a strong bank party in the Convention, and he was
willing to have the test question upon banks taken at the present
time. He hoped the motion would be modified so as to raise the
issue. He believed that some members favorable to banks would
receive such instructions from the constituents as would control
their course, and he wished to know how the Convention was
divided on the question at the present time.

Mr. CAMPBELL, of M'Donough, moved to have the sections
of the New York constitution, on the subject of banks, read;
which was agreed to, and the sections were read.

Mr. HURLBUT did not, when he offered the resolution, expect
that it would evolve an issue on the absorbing question of banks,
which he was aware was one of the most important that would
probably engage the attention of the Convention; but if gentlemen
were desirous of raising the question at the present time, he was
ready to meet them. If they were anxious to take up this ques-
tion, without any preparation, he would not object. If they feel
strong enough to apply the rigid rules of party discipline, let them
proceed. For his part he did not desire to draw party lines unless
forced into it. He represented whigs and democrats and was
determined to do justice to both. This question was one of
absorbing interest to his constituents — they desired a sound
currency, and, irrespective of party upon this, as well as other
questions, he desired to consult their wishes and their interests.
He did not, however, rise to discuss the merits of the question.
He would infinitely prefer that the debate should be suffered to
lie over to a future time; but, as he before remarked, if gentlemen
wish to test the question now, he was ready to gratify them. It
is a resolution of inquiry merely, which he had not expected
would meet with opposition.

Mr. GREGG said that the resolution offered by the gentleman
from Boone was respectful in its terms, and courtesy required that
it should go to the committee. It was merely a resolution of
inquiry and he could not vote against its reference.

TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1847 87

Mr. PALMER, of Marshall, also advocated its reference.

Mr. SCATES was in favor of bringing the questions up at an
early day of the session. Much interest in it was felt, as well by
the people, as most of the members of the Convention. It had
now assumed a shape in which it was debateable, and, for one, he
was ready to engage in it. The time between the final adjourn-
ment and the day appointed for the people to vote upon the
constitution, will be so short as to preclude the people from
obtaining the requisite information, to enable them to vote
understandingly, unless the subject is taken up early. Yesterday,
the resolutions of the gentleman from Jo Daviess, (Mr. Pratt,)
to prohibit banking in any form, were before the Convention;
now the question comes up in a different shape, viz:
a proposition to adopt the features of the general banking law oi
New York. He did not care how the question was presented so
that the issue was made. He agreed fully with the gentleman
from Boone, (Mr. Hurlbut,) that the question was one of the
utmost importance, and he gave notice, that whenever it came
to be acted upon, he should oppose and vote against banks in
every form. He would make war upon them to the knife. He
asked if gentlemen were prepared to let loose upon our State a
flood of banks such as a constitution, like that of New York,
would call into existence? The system is infinitely worse than
the old system; for it opens a door to the creation of an endless
number of banks. If one bank is mischievous, how much more
so must a hundred be? Past experience has proved to us that in
agricultural communities such institutions are a curse, and we
have found that the small bills of the thousand and one banks in
our country have materially retarded our prosperity. The first
proposition that was presented, related to small bills. Now,
every man must admit, that this description of circulating medium
must drive specie out of circulation. If we prohibit the circulation
of bank bills of a less denomination than twenty dollars, all busi-
ness transactions and contracts of a less amount will be carried
on in gold and silver. If we do not prohibit we must necessarily
have an almost exclusive paper circulation. It was so in the
section where he lived. Before the Ohio and Kentucky banks
flooded his region with their ones and twos, specie was plenty,

88 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

but now the metals had almost entirely disappeared. He was
for driving small bills out of circulation.^*

Gentlemen had expressed a willingness to vote for referring
the substitute to a committee; but he saw no impropriety in
discussing it before it was sent to the committee, if it was to be
sent at all. — We cannot expect the committee to report in such
a manner as to meet the views of the Convention, unless full
discussion is had in advance. He desired that the committee
should enter upon their deliberations with all the light which a
debate in this body could elicit.

He had often heard of well regulated banks, but he never
knew one of that character. We have had in this State experience
enough on this subject to have learned that they are fraught with
disaster and ruin. We have had six banks, every one of which
failed, involving the people in losses which millions of dollars
would not repair, and now a proposition is brought forward to
repeat the experiment on a grand scale; to establish a bank in
every town and village, and deluge the State with paper money.
If we desire a valuable and reliable circulating medium, we must,
as all experience shows, exclude bank paper entirely.

He hoped that the discussion would proceed.

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, said, that he had, on a former
occasion, expressed his views in favor of a full, free and candid
interchange of sentiment upon every and all subjects that might
arise in that body; and he would not interpose an obstacle to a
respectful consideration of every proposition that gentlemen
might deem proper to submit. The gentleman from Boone (Mr.
Hurlbut) has offered a resolution, the subject of which he
(Mr. H.) desired to have investigated by a committee. — He
(Mr. C.) saw no impropriety in the reference. He would vote
for referring it, and he hoped that the committee would give it
their attention. All that the people want on the subject of
banking is light. Let us have light, and those opposed to banks
have nothing to fear. As for himself, he was prepared to oppose
banks in any form when the question should be properly and
fairly presented, even though their advocates might "steal the

I'^On the question of banks and banking in Illinois, see Dowrie, The
Development of Banking in Illinois.

TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1847 89

livery of Heaven" to clothe them in. He hoped that the resolution
would be permitted to go to the committee.

Mr. JENKINS thought the merits of the question should be
discussed in the committee of the whole, where every proposition
relating to it could be considered. When the question should
come up he would oppose the creation of banks in any form. As
at present presented, he was not disposed to discuss the merits of
the question.

Mr. EDWARDS of SangamoVi, said, that if gentlemen opposed
to banks could not be converted, discussion would be useless, and
a decision of the question upon the test offered by the resolution
of the gentleman from Boone (Mr. Hurlbut) would settle the
matter.

Mr. ARCHER was prepared to vote against banks in every
form in which they could be presented, yet, out of courtesy, he
was willing to give the resolution the direction which the gentle-
man from Boone (Mr. Hurlbut) desired. If the question was
pressed, he (Mr. A.) would vote to lay the resolution on the
table; yet he deprecated any attempt to stifle debate. He was
for discussing, fully, this, as well as every other question. He
hoped the resolution would be referred to the committee, and
when it should come up again in a proper form he would be
prepared to record his vote against it.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair, was also in favor of referring it to
the committee. He hoped his honorable friend from Fulton
(Mr. Markley) would withdraw his motion to lay on the table.
Other propositions relative to banks had been referred to the
committee, and he trusted that this would also be referred.

Mr. KNAPP, of Scott, made some remarks against banks and
banking, and urged the necessity of excluding the circulation of
small notes."

Without taking the question, the Convention adjourned till
to-morrow morning.

"Mr. Knapp later sent the following correction to the Illinois State
Register, which published it in its issue of June 19, at the close of the June
18 debates: "In your paper of Saturday you report me as having made
some remarks against banks and banking, and as offering a resolution in
favor of excluding from circulation small notes. Mi. Moffitt was the
gentleman who made the remarks and offered the resolution."

VIII. WEDNESDAY, JUNE i6, 1847

Mr. ECCLES, from the Revenue committee, reported the
following:

Resolved, That the new constitution shall provide for a poll tax.

Mr. ROUNTREE moved to amend by adding, "Provided,
that the power to lay a capitation tax by the Legislature be pro-
posed as a distinct proposition for adoption or rejection, by the
people at the same time and places at which the vote shall be
taken on the adoption or rejection of the new constitution, and
if it shall appear that at said election, more votes are given in
favor of said proposition than are given against it, the Legislature
shall at its next session thereafter provide by law for levying such
capitation tax, and continuing in force a law for the collection
of a capitation tax: Provided, however, that non-payment of
such tax shall not disqualify persons who are otherwise qualified
voters from enjoying the right of election."

Mr. SCATES opposed the levying of a poll tax. In supporting
the government, respect should be had to justice. He thought
that the principal [sic] of a poll tax was unjust. Its advocates con-
tended, that all those receiving protection from government
should render an equivalent for that protection. Why not then,
tax females as well as males — they receive the same protection.
Why not tax every class — Indians, negroes and every description
of persons? It is idle to lay a tax when it cannot be collected.
If you levy this tax, you must provide a means of collecting it,
and that can be done only by issuing execution or by imposing
the punishment of imprisonment for a failure to pay it. If you
do not imprison, but merely resort to the ordinary civil remedy
for the collection of debts, the proceeds of your poll tax will be
absorbed in paying the costs of suits against delinquents. If
imprisonment should be restarted to, is it expected that the public
sentiment will sanction it? Is it proposed to withhold the elective
franchise from such as have not their vouchers to prove that they

WEDNESDAY, JUNE i6, 1847 91

have paid the tax? Such a denial of privilege is inconsistent with
the principles of equality and the freedom of elections.

It is a great mistake to suppose that the class who own no
property do not bear a share of the public burthens. They do
contribute to the support of the government and render an ample
equivalent for the protection they receive from the laws and the
institutions of government. They pay an onerous tax in the form
of road labor, and this is a capitation tax amounting to from two
to five dollars per annum. In addition to this they are liable to
do military duty, and this is in its nature a poll tax. Is not this
enough? Are they to be asked to pay fifty cents or a dollar more?
In health they are willing to labor on the roads, and when their
country calls, they are willing to engage in her service and march
to the battle-field. They have been misrepresented by those who
call them pensioners upon the bounty of the government. For
his part he was opposed in principle to the scheme of easing the
wealthy of such burthens of government as should properly rest
upon them and transfer them to the poor.

As he before said if the tax should be levied it cannot be
collected. The government may assess it, but it will be optional
with the class which it is intended to reach to pay it or not. In
the slave states there is a greater reason for such a tax. There
the white head and negro head pay alike, and the rich man pays a
hundred dollars poll tax where the poor man pays one. Here it
is proposed to make the poor pay equally with the wealthy. In
the imposition of taxes, he was in favor of a just rule of apportion-
ment, and he would not have the wealthy relieved to burthen the
indigent.

In what way is it expected that our debt is to be paid, but from
our vast natural resources. Is it expected that it can be done by
laying an assessment upon property? If it is proposed to raise a
certain sum by means of this tax, let the same sum be raised by
taxing property. This was what his constituents desired, not
because they were unwilling to pay a poll tax, but because they
believed such a tax unjust in principle. If the sum that is pro-
posed to be raised by it, is all that is wanted, he could devise a
wiser plan, viz: that of re-organizing the county governments so

92 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

that they may be administered at half the present cost; thus
leaving a large balance in the treasury.

Mr. SMITH, of Macon, moved to amend the amendment by
adding the following:

Provided, That the Legislature in exercising this power be
limited to the sum of fifty cents upon the persons of all able-
bodied men, between the ages of twenty-one and forty-five years,
and the power not to be exercised after the present public debt of
the State shall have been liquidated.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that he could not agree
with the gentleman from Jefferson, (Mr. Scates,) who takes the
ground that the proposed tax is wrong in principle. Every man
owes something to the government from which he receives pro-
tection— the man who owns no property as well as him who does —
and as a patriot he should be willing to pay it.

He was opposed to making the payment of the tax a pre-
requisite to the right of suffrage. He would do nothing to limit
that right. He believed that no coercion was necessary to
collect the proposed tax, the people would pay it without com-
pulsion.

The gentleman from Jefferson says that the poor pay a road
tax and are liable to do military duty. So do the rich. In
representative governments where all are equal, and participate
equally in the benefits of government, all ought to contribute to
its support, in proportion to the benefits they receive; and he did
not doubt that all would be willing to give a consideration for such
benefits.

He knew that the people of his region were in favor of the tax,
and if imposed, he doubted not that they would pay it. If now
and then one should refuse, be it so — he would not fail to be held
up to the contempt of the community, which would prove a
powerful incentive to a compliance with the provision. He
(Mr. D.) would support the last amendment.

Mr. WOODSON said, that his constituents were in favor of a
poll tax. A vote was taken upon it at the election, and out of
1500 or 1600 votes, not more (as Mr. W. was understood to
say) than 150 were against the tax, and out of the 150, at least
100 were property holders. This showed how the people of

WEDNESDAY, JUNE j6, 1847 93

Greene stood on this question, and he did not think they
were more patriotic than the people of other counties. He
believed that the whole people of the State, without regard to
location, were in favor of the tax. If he believed with the gentle-
man from Jefferson, (Mr. Scates) that the provision would be
unequal, he would oppose it as strenuously as any member; but
he thought it a just and equal tax. Will any man say that he, as
an individual, is not as valuable as any other individual, though
he may not be a property holder? All men, however humble,
have a certain pride of character, and they would scorn the
imputation of ranking in a lower grade than their fellow men. It
is an error to suppose that, because a man is poor, he must be
unwilling to contribute his just proportion to the support of the
government. If a man is unable to pay the tax he would not
exact it. All able-bodied men ought to pay it — the old and infirm
and disabled might be excused.

Gentlemen say that the effect of the tax will be to take the
burthens of government from the poor and impose them upon
the rich; but he did not regard it in that light. The rich, who
already pay high taxes, will also pay a poll. No burthen is taken
from them, but rather one added to those already resting upon
them.

He asked gentlemen to examine the question as patriots.
Can they lay their hands upon their bosoms and justify them-
selves in returning to their constituents, without having done
something to relieve the State of the odium of repudiation and
non-payment which rests upon it? Are they prepared to go home,
leaving the State burthened with her enormous debt, without
having made any provision for its ultimate liquidation.

This proposition is not a novel one. In only two of the States
is it prohibited. The constitution of all the other States either
impose it or leave it open to the Legislature. Eight have provi-
sions imposing it. Our constitution leaves it to the Legislature,
yet it has not been levied. Politicians in the Legislature have
had an eye more to popularity than the happiness, prosperity and
glory of the State. It isjhigh time that a different system from
this was established, and it is the duty of this Convention to put
forth its power to establish it.

94 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

This tax will yield a revenue of not l[e]ss than $100,000.
There are in the State 126,000 persons liable to do military duty;
and taking this as the data — which he thought was as correct as
any — his estimate of the amount of revenue could not be much
out of the way.

The argument of the gentleman from Jefferson, that the tax
cannot be collected, is no argument against the principle involved
in the proposition. It is (said Mr. W.) our duty to impose
the tax, and it will be that of the Legislature to devise the
means of enforcing its collection. But he saw no difficulty in
collecting it. He was not in favor of stringent measures, neither
did he deem them necessary. He would not resort to imprison-
ment, nor a restriction of the right of suffrage. The end might be
attained by moral means. Moral suasion was more powerful
than coercive enactments. That pride, which is inherent in
human nature, will prompt the payment of this tax, if not from
patriotic motives, at least, from that apprehension of being held
up to the public scorn for delinquency.

To say that the people of Illinois would not pay this tax, was
an imputation upon that patriotic devotion to the honor of the
State and the nation, which prompted her gallant sons to march
forth shoulder to shoulder to meet the enemy of our common
country. Will any one say that these heroic men, who redeemed
the honor of the State upon the battle-fields of Buena Vista and
Cerro Gordo, will not as readily step forward and maintain her
character in the financial embarrassments in which she is involved?
He believed that they would, with the same power and in the same
manner, come up to the work until our State should be free from
the load of debt which oppresses her.

Mr. THOMAS moved to lay the amendments on the table.
Carried.

Mr. NORTON proposed the following amendment:

"Provided, That no capitation tax shall be assessed against

any person not entitled to vote under the constitution and laws

of the State. And, provided, further, that said tax shall be set

apart to the payment of the public debt, until the same be paid."

Mr. HARVEY moved the following amendment:

"That the 20th section of the 8th article of the present con-

WEDNESDAY, JUNE /6, 1847 95

stitution be omitted in the constitution, to be proposed for adop-
tion by this Convention."

Mr. H. conceived that this subject should be left to the
discretion of the Legislature. The constitution about to be
formed may not be changed for many years, and no unnecessary
restraints should be imposed. He was opposed to a provision
prohibiting the levying a poll tax, but disposed to leave the ques-
tion open to future legislatures.

Mr. WILLIAMS said that the Convention would make more
satisfactory progress in business, by doing one thing at a time.
He was of opinion that if the question were submitted to the
people, they would provide for a poll tax, if so, this Convention
ought, in reference to the public will. He thought that a direct
vote should be taken, whether a poll tax is to be provided for or
not; then we should know what we are to do. If the tax is to be
levied, we can hereafter settle upon the best plan to pursue. If
not, there is an end of the matter, and the Convention will not be
disposed further to discuss it.

Mr. NORTON said, that he was opposed to the levying of a
capitation tax but the character of such a measure will depend
much on the manner and form of its assessment. He desired the
original resolution to pass, with his amendment. If no law is to
be enacted to enforce the collection of this tax, such a provision
would be mere advice — a subscription, depending on voluntary
payment. The only two modes of enforcing collection would be
by imprisonment or withholding the elective franchise. He was
opposed to either of these, and could not consent in any degree
to sanction the imposition of degrading penalties upon citizens,
because they might be too poor to pay the tax. The poor are
the men to fight our battles, work our roads, sit on juries — the
men who have carried the banner of their country to the battle-
field, and conferred immortal honor on their State, at Beuna
Vista and Cerro Gordo. To tax these men, and deprive them of
the common rights of citizenship, on account of their inability to
pay, is unfair, unequal and unjust.

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, craved the indulgence of the Conven-
tion, feeling it due to himself to express his views on the subject.
He replied to the argument of Mr. Scates, and denied that the

96 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

levying a poll-tax was unjust in its operation. It would be
difficult to prove the correctness of such a position in a country
like this, where every citizen enjoys the protection of the govern-
ment, and participates in public affairs to an equal extent. He
thought men who had displayed such patriotism as has been dis-
played by our people within the last year, will not shrink from so
trifling a tax, which is necessary to save the credit of the State.
He believed that at no time in our history, from the time when
our fathers achieved the independence of their country at York-
town, down to this time, have our people been wanting in that
patriotism, which has enabled them, and will enable us, to meet
every sacrifice required to advance the public good.

He could see no injustice in the proposition. If one man, by
industry and frugality, acquires property, and another, in con-
sequence of his indolence and vicious habits, remains poor, is
there a reason why one should be burdened and the other released
from all contribution for the support of the government, the
protection and blessings of which they equally share? During
the canvass for his seat in this body, he was often interrogated by
both rich and poor, as to his opinions on this point, and he found
few, very few indeed, who were not earnest in their desire that this
provision, or one like it, should be incorporated in the new consti-
tution.— Such a principle is incorporated in the constitution of
every State, save two. Virginia, the great republican leader of
States, which has given to the nation so many great men — the
mother of Presidents, has stood in the front rank, and by the
adoption of such measures as were necessary to preserve the
public credit, has set an example which he hoped Illinois would
follow. Could this measure be proved unjust and oppressive, he
would oppose it; but believing it in accordance with principles of
enlightened public policy, he approved it, and believed the whole
country to be with him.

Mr. CHURCHILL said, that he was opposed to taking
advantage of the generosity of the poor, to pay the State debt.
He believed that for property protection, the rich were only
benifitted, [sic] while for personal protection, the rich andpoorwere
equal, therefore, he was opposed to the poll-tax. He would have

WEDNESDAY, JUNE i6, 1847 97

proposed an amendment, but the state of the question prevented,
therefore, he would read it for the benefit of the house.

Resolved, That the committee on Revenue be instructed to
ascertain the number of males over twenty-one years of age, in
the State, and report a resolution to this Convention proposing
to increase the revenue of this State, by a sum in dollars, equal to
the number of white male inhabitants over the age of twenty-one
years, by a direct tax on property.

Mr. KNOWLTON was in favor of the resolution, as it came
from the committee, and proposed to dispose of the amendments,
and let the vote be taken on the original proposition. His con-
stituents were in favor of a poll-tax. He referred to the example
of Massachusetts, which had a poll-tax of $1.50 each, the right
of voting being withdrawn, on failure to pay. He always found
the poor more prompt than the rich, in the payment of this tax.
He believed that no citizen in Illinois was too poor to pay such a
tax, and that the poor would, as they do in Massachusetts, feel a
pride in paying this tax which would serve the end proposed.
Mr. K. spoke eloquently of the patriotism of our people — their
State pride; the determination of all to sustain the honor and
credit of the State — as evinced in the patience with which they
have submitted to every necessary exaction, and rushed forth, at
the call of their country, to fight her battles, and sacrifice their
lives in defence of her honor.

Mr. SINGLETON was also in favor of the original proposition.
It was a simple one, and involved in it no difficulty; and should
be settled at once. He was in favor of a poll tax, and knew
that his constituents desired its imposition. He deprecated the
dragging into this discussion the poor, the women and children.
All men are originally poor; all equal. This equality is in a great
measure destroyed by misdirected legislation and the customs of
society. The object of the provision is to increase revenue.
Property holders were willing to pay, not only on their property,
but on their persons also, in the same manner as the poor. Let
property pay — let tnen, each separately, without confounding the
distinction which should exist between persons and property. He
believed that this measure would embarrass none — that young
men would cheerfully pay it. And there is a large class of men.

98 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

worthless in property and character, who are active in elections;
who enjoy the elective franchise; who are under the control of
politicians. Impose this tax upon such, and, though they pay
none now, their taxes will be paid, if not by them, by those desiring
the benefit of their votes. He believed with the gentleman from
Massac, that three-fourths of the people are in favor of it. He
wished the decisive vote to be taken on the original proposition,
leaving the details to future action.

The discussion was continued with much animation by Messrs.
Thompson, Allen and Loudon, when the Convention adjourned
till three o'clock this afternoon.

AFTERNOON

Mr. ARCHER made a forcible speech of some length against
the tax, which we are compelled to condense. He said that in
the county where he resided the people were opposed to the prin-
ciple of a poll-tax. They thought that property constituted the
just basis of taxation. It is true that government is instituted
for the protection of life, liberty and property, and that all ought
to assist in supporting it according to their ability, and he insisted
that the poor contributed largely to it by paying a road tax, doing
militia duty and juror's duty. As regards these taxes, the poor
stand on the same footing with the rich — they pay and perform
as much. He would not add a poll-tax.

Again, he would not enact a law which was not accompanied
with proper penalties for enforcing an observance of its behests.
If the payment of a poll tax is attempted to be coerced by taking
away the elective franchise or by imprisonment, the people would
revolt. He asked if the poor man was a fit subject for imprison-
ment? Should he be deprived of his right of suffrage? Any man
who would propose it would be doomed to private life for the
residue of his days.

Mr. A. here proceeded to show that our State debt, for the
payment of which this poll tax was devised, was created by a
class of speculators who expected to be benefited by the applica-
tion of the money so borrowed, and that the poor had no part in
its creation, neither would they have been benefited materially
had the most sanguine expectations of the internal improvement

WEDNESDAY, JUNE j6, 1847 99

schemers been realized. We regret that we cannot give all of
Mr. A.'s sound and interesting remarks on this head. We may
do so hereafter.

Mr. PETERS addressed the Convention in favor of a poll tax.
He thought it just. The object of government is two fold; the
protection of persons and property. He asked if property should
alone support the government, whilst persons went free. There
is property in the free air of heaven, and those who breathe it
ought to pay a tax when it is the air of freedom. He did not see
any justice in throwing the whole burthen of supporting the
government upon one class, whilst another enjoyed an immunity
from all burthens. Persons without property have access to the
courts of justice and participate in the blessings of government,
why, then, he asked, should they not be made to bear part of the
public burthens growing out of it.

Mr. P. advocated the tax, leaving it to the Legislature to
enforce its collection.

Gentlemen say that if limiting the right to vote is resorted to,
it will induce candidates to bribe the voters. This was in his
judgment a lame argument. If it is so easy to bribe, could it not
now be done at the polls by handing fifty cents to a voter.

He did not believe that penalties of any kind were necessary.
The people had too much pride to refuse to pay the tax.

Mr. HAYES made a very animated speech in favor of the
tax, which we have in manuscript and may publish it when we
get more space. It was worthy of his distinguished talents.

Mr. GEDDES made a few remarks in favor of the tax. He
said that in the course of the debate gentlemen had said that the
people were already taxed four or five dollars in road taxes,
yet they said that these same people could not be made to pay a
tax of one dollar. They can be forced to pay five dollars but
they cannot be forced to pay one dollar. Mr. G. proceeded to
show that assertions that had been made on the subject of mili-
tary duty were incorrect. He said that no military duty was
exacted of any citizen in the State. We must defer the rest of
Mr. G.'s remarks for want of space.

The debate was continued by Messrs. M'CALLEN,CAMPBELLof Jo
Daviess, and PALMERof Macoupin, when the Convention adjourned.

IX. THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Hale.

Mr. BLAIR, a delegate from Pike, appeared, presented his
credentials, and was qualified.

The question before the Convention being the amendments
offered by the gentlemen from Will and Knox, the Chair
stated that the amendment of the gentleman from Knox was then
out of order, and it was withdrawn.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery stated, that upon consultation
with some of the friends of the poll-tax they had concluded to
move that the amendment now before the Convention should be
laid on the table, which motion he would make before he took his
seat. He would do so with a view to present the following, as
a substitute for the original proposition: strike out all after the
word "resolved" and insert "that the committee on Revenue be,
and are hereby, instructed to report an amendment to the consti-
tution so as to authorize the Legislature to levy a capitation tax,
not to exceed one dollar, on all free white male inhabitants over
the age of twenty-one years, when they shall deem it necessary."

He was in favor of this plan, because it left the subject of a
poll-tax to the people. Gentlemen objected to a poll-tax because
the people could not at any time change it. This proposed sub-
stitute would enable the people at any time to instruct their
representatives to change or abolish the tax. He moved to lay
the amendment of the gentleman from Will on the table; which
was carried.

The question then recurring on the amendment, it was decided
in the affirmative — yeas 87.

Mr. POWERS offered an amendment providing that no road
tax should hereafter be levied in the form of a capitation tax.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to lay it on the table.
Carried.

Mr. WORCESTER offered a substitute, which the Chair
ruled out of order.

THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1847 loi

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved the previous question,
which was seconded; and the question being taken on the adoption
of the resolution, by yeas and nays, it was decided in the affirma-
tive—yeas 108, nays 49.

The following resolutions, offered some days ago, by Mr.
Pratt, together with the amendment, proposed by Mr.
HuRLBUT, thereto, came up:

Mr. Hurlbut's amendment:

"That the committee on Incorporations be instructed to
inquire into the expediency of so amending and altering the 21st
section of article 8 of the constitution, as to provide for a system
of general banking laws, similar in principle with the propositions
lately adopted in the State of New York."

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Mr. CHURCHILL moved to lay the whole matter on the
table.

Mr. MARKLEY asked a division upon laying the amendment
on the table, and the vote being taken by yeas and nays, resulted
as follows:

YEAS — Akin, Allen, Anderson, Archer, Armstrong, Atherton,
Blair, Blakely, Ballingall, Brockman, Bond, Bosbyshell, Brown,
Bunsen, Butler, Grain, Caldwell, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Carter,
F. S. Casey, Zadoc Casey, Choate, Cross of Woodford, Cloud,
Dale, Davis of Bond, Davis of Massac, Dawson, Dement, Dunn,
Dunsmore, Eccles, Evey, Farwell, Frick, Green of Clay, Green of
Jo Daviess, Hatch, Hawley, Hayes, Heacock, Henderson, Hill,
Hoes, Hogue, Hunsaker, James, Jenkins, Jones, Knapp of Scott,
Kreider, Kinney of Bureau, Kinney of St. Clair, Lasater, Laughlin,
Lenley, Logan, Loudon, McCallen, McCuUy, McClure, McHatton,
Manly, Markley, Mason, MofFett, Moore, Morris, Nichols, Oliver,

I02 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Pace, Palmer of Macoupin, Palmer of Marshall, Pratt, Peters,
Powers, Robbins, Robinson, Roman, Rountree, Scates, Sharpe,
Stadden, Shields, Sherman, Sim, Simpson, Smith of Gallatin,
Shumway, Thompson, Trower, Tutt, Vernor, Wead, Webber,
West, Williams, Witt, Whiteside.— 99.

NAYS — Adams, Canady, Campbell of McDonough, Cross of
Winnebago, Church, Churchill, Davis of McLean, Deitz, Dummer,
Dunlap, Edwards of Madison, Edwards of Sangamon, Edmonson,
Graham, Geddes, Green of Tazewell, Grimshaw, Harding, Harlan,
Harper, Harvey, Hay, Holmes, Hurlbut, Huston, Jackson, Judd,
Knapp of Jersey, Kenner, Kitchell, Knowlton, Knox, Lander,
Lemon, Lockwood, Marshall of Coles, Marshall of Mason,
Matheny,Mieure, Miller, Minshall, Northcott, Norton, Pinckney,
Rives, Swan, Spencer, Servant, Sibley, Singleton, Smith of Macon,
Thomas, Thornton, TurnbuU, Turner, Tuttle, Vance, Whitney,
Woodson, Worcester. — 60.

The question then recurring upon laying the original resolu-
tions on the table; when a division on the first of them was de-
manded, and the vote was taken.

Mr. Shumway, Mr. Manly and others expressed themselves
most emphatically opposed to banks in any shape whatever,
yet they deemed a prohibitory clause in the constitution impractic-
able, they therefore voted to lay the instructions on the table.

Several gentlemen having expressed themselves as having
voted under a misapprehension of the question and desirous to
change their votes,

Mr. CALDWELL moved that the vote be retaken; which
motion was carried. And the yeas and nays being again called
resulted as follows:

YEAS — Adams, Anderson, Atherton, Blakely, Butler, Canady,
Campbell of McDonough, Choate, Cross of Winnebago, Cloud,
Church, Churchill, Davis of McLean, Dawson, Deitz, Dummer,
Dunlap, Dunn, Dunsmore, Edwards of Madison, Edwards of
Sangamon, Eccles, Edmonson, Evey, Frick, Graham, Geddes,
Green of Clay, Green of Jo Daviess, Green of Tazewell, Grimshaw,
Harding, Harlan, Harper, Harvey, Hatch, Hawley, Hay, Heacock,
Henderson, Hill, Holmes, Hurlbut, Huston, Jackson, Judd, Knapp
of Jersey, Knapp of Scott, Kenner, Kinney of Bureau, Kitchell,

THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1847 103

Knowlton, Knox, Lander, Lemon, Lockwood, Logan, Loudon,
McCallen, McClure, McHatton, Manly, Marshall of Coles,
Marshall of Mason, Mason, Matheny, Mieure, Miller,
Minshall, MofFet, Moore, Morris, Northcott, Norton, Palmer of
Marshall, Peters, Pinckney, Rives, Robbins, Robinson, Swan,
Spencer, Sherman, Servant, Sibley, Singleton, Smith of Macon,
Shumway, Thomas, Thornton, Trower, TurnbuU, Turner, Tutt,
Tuttle, Vance, Webber, West, Williams, Whitney, Woodson,
Worcester. — 102.

NAYS — Akin, Allen, Archer, Armstrong, Blair, Ballingall,
Brockman, Bond, Bosbyshell, Brown, Bunsen, Grain, Caldwell,
Campbell of Jo Daviess, Carter, F. S. Casey, Zadoc Casey, Colby,
Constable, Cross of Woodford, Dale, Davis of Bond, Davis of
Massac, Dement, Farwell, Hayes, Hoes, Hogue, Hunsaker, James,
Jenkins, Jones, Kreider, Kinney of St. Clair, Lasater, Laughlin,
Lenley, McCully, Markley, Nichols, Oliver, Pace, Palmer of
Macoupin, Pratt, Powers, Roman, Rountree, Scates, Stadden,
Shields, Sim, Simpson, Smith of Gallatin, Thompson, Vernor,
Wead, Witt, Whiteside.— 58.

Mr. LOGAN said (when his name was called), that as other
gentlemen had defined their position, he would do so also. If we
were to have a bad system of banking or no banks presented to us,
he would prefer to vote for no bank; for the present he would vote
to lay this proposition on the table.

The question then recurred on the motion to lay the first of
the resolutions on the table.

Mr. HARVEY appealed to the maker of the motion to with-
draw it for a few moments, and it was withdrawn. Mr. H. then
said, that the resolutions before them instructed the committee
on Incorporations to report some mode of prohibiting the circula-
. tion of bank notes within the State, and he hoped it would not be
laid on the table at present, but discussed. He made this remark
at the suggestion of the committee. He understood that there
was a great difference of opinion in the Convention, as regarded
the proper mode of excluding paper from circulation, and he hoped
the question would be discussed. And, inasmuch as there were
several propositions of this nature before the Convention, some
of them going so far as to make all contracts and transactions

I04 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

based upon bank notes void, he hoped the Convention would
decide upon the matter before it came before the committee.

The yeas and nays were then called, and resulted as follows :

YEAS — Adams, Anderson, Atherton, Blair, Blakely, Butler,
Canady, Colby, Cross of Winnebago, Church, Churchill,
Davis of Montgomery, Davis of McLean, Dawson, Deitz, Dummer,
Dunlap, Dunsmore, Edwards of Madison, Edwards of
Sangamon, Eccles, Evey, Frick, Graham, Geddes, Green of Clay,
Green of Jo Daviess, Green of Tazewell, Grimshaw, Harding,
Harlan, Harper, Harvey, Hatch, Hawley, Hay, Heacock, Hill,
Hogue, Holmes, Hunsaker, Hurlbut, Jackson, James, Jones, Judd,
Knapp of Jersey, Knapp of Scott, Kenner, Kinney of Bureau,
Kitchell, Knowlton, Knox, Lander, Laughlin, Lemon, Lockwood,
Logan, Loudon, McCallen, McClure, Manly, Marshall of Coles,
Marshall of Mason, Mason, Matheny, Mieure, Movia, Nichols,
Northcott, Norton, Palmer of Marshall, Peters, Pinckney, Powers,
Rives, Robbins, Robinson, Rountree, Swan, Spencer, Sherman,
Servant, Sibley, Sim, Simpson, Singleton, Smith of Macon,
Thomas, Thornton, Trower, Turnbull, Turner, Tuttle, Vance,
Webber, West, Williams, Whitney, Woodson, Worcester. — loi.

NAYS — Akin, Allen, Archer, Armstrong, Ballingall, Brockman,
Bond, Bosbyshell, Brown, Bunsen, Crain, Caldwell, Campbell of
Jo Daviess, Campbell of McDonough, Carter, F. S. Casey, Zadoc
Casey, Choate, Constable, Cross of Woodford, Cloud, Dale, Davis
of Massac, Dement, Dunn, Edmonson, Gregg, Hayes, Henderson,
Hoes, Huston, Jenkins, Kreider, Kinney of St. Clair, Lasater,
Lenley, McCully, McHatton, Markley, Miller, Minshall, MofFett,
Moore, Oliver, Pace, Palmer of Macoupin, Pratt, Roman, Scates,
Stadden, Shields, Smith of Gallatin, Shumway, Thompson, Tutt,
Vernor, Wead, Witt, Whiteside.— 58.

The resolutions were then withdrawn.

Mr. ROBBINS presented a petition from citizens of Randolph,
praying a constitutional provision exempting from execution a
homestead of 160 acres of land, and moved to refer it to a select
committee of five.

Mr. SCATES moved to refer it to [the] committee on Law Re-
form. Carried.

Mr. JONES presented a petition from Perry county, praying

THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1847 105

equal rights and privileges to all persons, without distinction of
color, and moved its reference to the committee on Elections and
Right of Suffrage.

Mr. J. said, it was well known by these petitioners, as well as
all others who are acquainted with my sentiments upon this
subject, that I am opposed to the principal object sought to be
affected by this petition. Nevertheless it comes from a highly
respectable portion of our fellow-citizens — mostly, I believe, from
the moral and intelligent denomination of christians called
Covenanters. — They have a right to make their sentiments known
in this body, and it is our duty to receive their petitions and treat
them with respectful consideration.

Mr. SINGLETON moved that it be laid on the table till
December next, one year. He extended the time for fear that we
might overtake the matter.

Mr. WHITNEY trusted that the petition would be treated
respectfully, and he hoped no such course would be pursued as
that contemplated by the motion of the gentleman from Brown.

Mr. CHURCH thought that in the petition were presented
some principles that would have to come before the Convention
at some time, and he hoped the petition would be treated respect-
fully and referred.

Mr. PINCKNEY said, he was no abolitionist. That party
he had always opposed, and they opposed him. They had tried to
prevent his being here in the Convention. Yet he was willing
to treat them with all respect. There were reasonable abolition-
ists, and they were as much entitled to be heard as any other
reasonable men.

He was opposed to all gag laws, and was willing to hear the
petitions, sentiments and views of every one. If that party could
convince him that such a provision as that prayed for should be
in our constitution he would vote for it. Gentlemen expected
him to be and he was open to conviction on other subjects,
and why not upon this.

Mr. KINNEY moved to lay the petition on the table.

Mr. LOGAN said, he supposed that a man might vote for a
reference of this petition to a committee without being called an
abolitionist. He had never had that name applied to him, and

io6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

he did not care if it should be. He would further say, that if you
wanted to have an abolition party in this State, the best way to
commence was by treating them disrespectfully.

The yeas and nays were demanded and they stood yeas 48,
nays no.

The petition was then referred to the committee on Elections
and Right of Suffrage.

Mr. SCATES, from the committee on the Judic[i]ary, in
obedience to the direction of that committee, reported to the
Convention a resolution calling upon the clerk of the Supreme
Court to inform said committee of the number of cases tried at
each term of said court since 1840, and the number now pending
and undecided; which resolution was adopted.

Mr. SHERMAN, from the committee on Finance, reported
back a resolution that had been referred to it, in relation to the
levying a tax on gold watches, jewelry, &c., and the appropriation
thereof, together with all moneys arising from fines, to the school
fund, and asked to be discharged from the further consideration
thereof.

Mr. DAWSON moved that the resolution be referred to the
committee on Education.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery made some remarks explanatory
of the reasons why the committee had so reported, and

Mr. MARKLEY moved to lay the resolution on the table.
Carried.

Mr. SCATES, from the Judiciary committee, reported back
to the Convention the resolution which had been referred to it in
relation to the election of sheriffs, &c., and recommended its
rejection. The committee instructed him to do so, because they
considered that the subject properly belonged to another committee.
The report was concurred in.

Mr. SCATES, from the same committee, also reported back
the resolution in relation to the abolition of the county commis-
sioners' court, and asked to be discharged from the further con-
sideration of the subject. The committee gave as the reasons of
the report, that the subject matter of the resolution properly
belonged to another committee.

THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1847 107

Mr. CONSTABLE inquired of the chairman of the committee
what committee it was deemed more proper to send this subject to?

Mr. SCATES. The committee on County Organizations.

Mr. CONSTABLE still thought that the Judiciary committee
was the proper committee to inquire into the propriety of abolish-
ing a court.

Mr. SCATES said, he would add that the committee had
further instructed him to recommend the repeal of the 4th section
of the schedule to the constitution.

Mr. LOGAN said, he was not present in the committee when
they agreed upon the report just made, but he would have been
in favor of it. He thought the abolition of the county commis-
sioners' court was not in the scope of the Judiciary committee's
duties. The court was not a court, except in name. It had no
power to try an action, or jurisdiction of a case of five dollars.
No indictments could be found; no other jurisdiction properly
belonging to a court was given to it. It was nothing more than a
mere fiscal agent of the county — opening and laying out roads,
collecting and distributing the revenue; these were its only powers.
Unless it was a court with judicial power, cognizance and capacity,
he could not suppose its abolition was a proper subject for the
Judiciary committee.

As regarded the abolition of this court, his personal opinion and
feelings would be to retain it; but he was apprised that his con-
stituents thought differently and he would represent them.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, that he had the greatest respect for
what the gentleman from Sangamon chose to express on any
question, but he must differ from him. In his opinion the county
commissioners' court was as much a court as the circuit court.
If that court was not a court, under what power did they issue
writs of ad quod damnum? In all cases where the county was a
party, that court was the first place where the subject was heard;
and from its decisions an appeal could be taken to the circuit
and supreme courts. He hoped, that in order that there might
be no collision or jarring between the actions of the committees in
relation to this matter, one committee might manage the whole
judicial affairs. He could not see how the abolition of this court
was the legitimate business of the committee on the Organization

io8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of Counties, unless the court be abolished, and then they
might, the county having no organization, propose some system.
After some further remarks from Mr. C, and from Mr. Minshall
in reply,

Mr. CALDWELL asked the chairman of the committee on
the Judiciary, if his committee intended to take into consideration
any provision for the future judicial affairs of the counties.

Mr. SCATES was understood to reply in the affirmative.

The report of the committee and the resolution were laid on
the table.

Mr. SCATES, from the same committee, made a report,
asking to be discharged from the further consideration of the
resolution in relation to the establishment of tribunals for arbi-
tration. The committee gave as a reason therefor, that there
were, at present, laws in force creating such tribunals. The report
was agreed to, and the resolution laid on the table.

Mr. SCATES made a report from the same committee, upon
another resolution, asking to be discharged from the further con-
sideration thereof; which was agreed to.

Mr. CALDWELL moved that the resolution be referred to
the committee on Rights. Agreed to.

Mr. ROUNTREE moved to take up some resolutions, offered
by him some days ago, and refer them to the committee on the
Judiciary. Carried.

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to take up some resolutions, offered
by him some days before, and that they be referred to the com-
mittee on Organization of Counties. Carried.

He also asked leave to withdraw some resolutions, heretofore
presented by him. Granted.

Mr. WOODSON moved to take up some resolutions, offered
by him some days before, and that they be referred to the com-
mittee on Education. Carried.

Mr. SCATES moved to take up certain resolutions, offered by
him, and that they be referred to the appropriate committee.
Carried.

Mr. LOCKWOOD offered several resolutions providing for
constitutional prohibitions against selling lottery tickets and

THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1847 109

granting divorces by the Legislature; and moved their reference
to the committee on Legislative Department. Carried.

Mr. EDMONSON offered the following resolutions:

Resolved, That the committee on the Judiciary be instructed
to inquire into the expediency of abolishing the office of Probate
Justice, in the several counties of this State, and giving to county
courts power to do probate business.

Resolved, That the committee on the Judiciary, be instructed
to inquire into the expediency of abolishing the office of County
Recorder, in the several counties of this State; and making the
clerks of the county courts recorders for the counties.

Mr. CHURCHILL offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That the committee on Incorporations be instructed
by this Convention, to report two propositions, to be submitted
to the people for their direct vote. One of which shall eventually
and effectually prohibit the circulation of all paper money as
currency. The other, giving to the General Assembly power to
pass, a restrictive general banking law; the resolutions to be em-
braced in the report.

Mr. McCALLEN offered a substitute.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the Convention adjourn till 3 p. m.

Mr. VANCE moved the Convention adjourn till to-morrow at
9 A. M. Carried.

X. FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Green, of Tazewell.^'

The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention a letter from the
clerk of the supreme court, answering the resolution of inquiry
addressed him yesterday. His letter states that at the July term
of that court in '41, the cases decided were 59; December term,
same year, 92; July term, '42, 140; December term, '43, 119;
December term, '44, ill; December term, '45, 171; December
term, '46, in; and now pending and undecided, 28.

Mr. SCATES moved to refer the letter to the committee on
the Judiciary.

Mr. NORTON moved that 200 copies of the letter be printed
for the use of the members. It was desirable that all the members
should have the advantage of all the information that had been
called for, and he considered the best mode of so doing would be
to print the reports.

Mr. MINSHALL asked the object of the motion to print.

Mr. NORTON said the committee had called for the informa-
tion, and he supposed had some object in so doing. If the report
of the clerk of the court was worth calling for, it was worth
printing. And the members should have every opportunity of
examining and knowing the whole of the information, on all
subjects laid before the Convention.

Mr. BROWN would like to know from the clerk of the supreme
court, the number of cases appealed to that court from the circuit
courts, and with a view of introducing a motion to that effect, he
moved to lay the motion to print on the table; which was carried.

Mr. SCATES, in reply to a question put to him, said one
object of the committee, in calling for the information, was to
ascertain the amount of business done in that court, to enable
them to form an idea of the necessary number of justices required
to perform the duties.

"Henry R. Green, delegate from Tazewell County. See the biographical
appendix.

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 in

Mr. HURLBUT stated similar reasons on his part, as a
member of the committee.

Mr. HAYES, from the committee on Law Reform, reported,
back the resolutions which had directed them to inquire into the
expediency of reporting a constitutional provision abolishing
capital punishment, and asked to be discharged from the further
consideration of the subject. He gave as the reasons of this
report, that the committee had concluded the subject did not
properly come under the duties of the Convention. The Conven-
tion had been called to amend the constitution, to distribute
the powers of government among the proper departments and the
remedying of grievances. The report was agreed to and the reso-
lutions were laid on the table.

Mr. LOCKWOOD, from the committee on the Executive
Department, reported back a series of resolutions which had been
referred to that committee, some of which they recommended
to be referred to other committees, and others with several
amendments in relation to the constitution to the Governor,
Lieut. Governor, &c.

Mr. CALDWELL moved that 200 copies of the report be
published and that it be for the present laid on the table. Carried.

Mr. JENKINS, from the committee on the Division and
Organization of Counties, reported back the resolution requiring
that no new county shall be formed unless the same contain an
area of 400 square miles, with an opinion that no such provision
ought to be inserted in the constitution; and asking to be discharged
from the further consideration of the same.

Mr. WEST opposed the report of the committee and their
recommendation. He said that he had not proposed the resolu-
tion they had reported back, but had a similar one prepared and
would have done so had he not been anticipated. The subject
of retrenchment had been much discussed, and though he intended
to make no speech aboutit, this proposition involved the principle.
The session of the Legislature had been always prolonged by the
business growing out of applications for new counties, and changing
the county seats, which were got up and advocated by numbers
of men who come down here to accomplish the object from
personal and interested motives alone. We had come here for

112 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

retrenchment and reform, and in this particular, by abridging the
length of the sessions of the Legislature, we would be carrying out
that principle. A provision, similar to the one embraced in this
resolution, had been adopted in Indiana, and no one who looked
at the matter doubted its propriety. The people in his county
had felt much interest in this matter, the subject had been agitated
there, by these proposals to change county seats. He entertained
the highest respect for the gentlemen composing this committee
and had hoped they would give this resolution a full deliberation;
they had no doubt thought they had done so, but he desired that
they would again take the matter and give it a further examination,
view it calmly and quietly, and information and facts would be
afforded them that would, no doubt, incline them to a different
opinion. '^

Mr. JENKINS said, that because the committee had asked
to be discharged from the further consideration of the resolution,
it should not be presumed that they intended to give the subject
of county division no further consideration. They would endeavor
by some provisions hereafter to remedy the evils complained of

Mr. BROCKMAN said, the committee had not had the
experience which members had who resided in small counties.
He represented a small county, and when you come into it and
have business with the county officers, you have to look for them
everywhere, and why? Because we cannot afford to pay them
sufficient to allow a man to remain in his office and attend to its
duties. He must be engaged in something else.

In case of a reduction of the number of representatives what
would small counties do? Small counties have to pay almost as
much taxes for officers as large ones. Small counties would be
entirely cut off in representation in the Legislature, and the people
of them could not be sued. Every session there are petitions for
new counties and the people's money squandered in legislating
upon them.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that he hoped this subject
would be referred again to the committee, or to a select or any
other appropriate committee. What scenes would be witnessed

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 113

here every year, when these petitions come before the Legislature
on this subject, asking for new counties. Fifty or sixty persons
came down here and hung round the Legislature at every session,
begging and endeavoring to carry through some one or other of
these measures; they were round the committee on Counties, and
affidavits upon affidavits were spread before them, with their
petitions. Every one knew how they were obtained, and by what
sort of persons.

There was but little difference between the expenses of small
counties and those of large ones and the less the number
of counties, the less expense it would be to the State.

This was an evil which the people were everywhere alive to
and he hoped the Convention would put a stop to it. He
hoped the provision requiring the 400 square miles to the county
would be adopted. In nine cases out of ten the petitions for these
new counties were got up by men looking for the county offices
to be created; or by men who were anxious to have the county seat
located on their land, thereby increasing its value. Indiana had a
provision of this kind in her constitution, and if he was not mis-
taken, Missouri also had one. No one there complains of it, and
every one admires the system. We already had one hundred
counties, and it would be much better if we had but sixty.

He hoped it would be adopted.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean, agreed with the gentleman last up.
This was of the greatest interest to the people of the region
he came from. On no subject were they more united than upon
this. No evil greater than this do they require this Convention
to correct.

Gentlemen cannot deny that great evil grows out of this
system of creating new counties every year. Indiana had a pro-
vision against it. Ohio, too, had one, and he believed the area
was larger in those States than 400 miles. There, every county
is respectable, and there are not those complaints about taxation.

The amount of taxation in large counties for the county
expenses was less than in smaller ones. Sangamon paid less than
Macon. These petitions were always the work of interested
persons. He was in favor of a prohibition against new counties
being formed with the area less than 400 miles, and also that the

114 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

county from which it should be taken should not be left smaller
than that. The attention of the people had been directed to this
question, and it was a serious one. By adopting this, weeks of
legislation would be saved. Since he had been in the State, a
great amount of the time of every Legislature had been wasted
upon this subject. The Legislature that met two years ago per-
formed a crowning act by creating no new county, the first time
anything of the kind had occurred. He moved the resolution be
recommitted to the committee with the following instructions.

"To report a provision, to be inserted in the constitution, that
no new county shall be established by the General Assembly, which
shall reduce the county or counties, or either of them, from
which it shall be taken, to less contents than 400 square miles;
nor shall any county be laid off of less contents, or any line of
which shall pass within less than ten miles of any county seat
already established."

Mr. THOMPSON was surprised, when economy, retrenchment
and reform were the order of the day, that anything of this kind —
the creation of new counties — should be heard in the Legislature.
He was in the Legislature some years ago, and there was a uni-
versal feeling to arrest the further sub-division of the counties;
some little arrangement took place between Scott and Morgan,
which created some local feeling in the Senate.

The State of New York had only 58 counties; some of them
had population enough to send a member to Congress. Penn-
sylvania, too, was of nearly the same area, and the same number
of counties. I was born in a county which was entitled to two
members of Congress, six Senators and sixty representatives; in
an evil day they were induced to cut it into tlu-ee oblong parts,
and the expenses were tripled if not qua,drupled.

I have the honor to represent a county of good size, and the
people are so tenacious of their land that they would not part
with a single foot of it. — If contiguous counties have any desire to
be attached to us, we are willing to receive them with open
arms. But before we part with a single inch of our land, we would,
Hotspur-like, quibble on the ninth part of a hair.

Mr. JENKINS. The committee intended to incorporate into
some report, something in relation to this matter, at another time.

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 115

He had not said a word about retrenchment, though others had.
The people do not expect us to retrench by restraining them in
their privileges. We have no right to restrain them in petitioning
for a new county when they deem such necessary. We have no
right to bind them down to silence by saying there shall be no new
county unless it contain an area of 400 miles. Gentlemen had
said that the petitions for the division of counties were always got
up by men with interested or dishonest motives. He admitted
that this might occur, but were they to presume that all men who
had a part in such questions were dishonest, and that they could
cheat the people? No, sir, the people are not so stupid — they are
not so easily cheated. If they were, they would not be capable of
self-government. What, then, becomes of the great principle of
government? When the people petition for a new county we
must presume that it was got up fairly. What would you say of
elections, because there may be dishonesty at one, must we pre-
sume all elections are but schemes of cheating?

Territory is not the basis of the organization of counties, but
population is the proper one. Suppose a case, where the territory
is 20 miles square, with a population of 1,000, and then a ter-
ritory of 18 square miles, with a population of 20,000; the
former may be made into a county and the latter cannot. This
would not be fair, and the basis would be unjust.

He had never seen a small county unable to get officers, or
desire to be attached to a larger one. Are we, he asked, to have
our counties organized only with a view that the officers may get
rich? The people have a right to petition to be organized into
new counties, when they do not injure another. This prin-
ciple perhaps might have been proper when the State was first
organized, but our State being so divided, as regards timber and
prairie land, the people have a right to petition to be organized
into counties with a view to their advantages. He hoped the
report of the committee would be adopted. He would repeat
again that if the people were not to be trusted with a right to
petition for a new county when they desired it, for fear they might
be cheated, they were not capable of self-government. The com-
mittee intended, when they made the report, to have asked that
some alteration might be made in the shape of the question.

ii6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

[Mr. WEAD said, that he understood we had adopted a rule,
a few days ago, that committees should not report the reasons for
their decisions, in writing, but the distinguished chairman of the
committee on Counties had thought proper to take a different
course, and had reported the reasons which governed the com-
mittee in making the report which had just been submitted.
Those reasons being now before the house, were a legitimate sub-
ject of investigation, and deserved to be examined. The honor-
able chairman had reported, as a reason for the action of the
committee, that large cities may hereafter arise in the State and
desire to be incorporated into separate counties, and they ought
not to be denied that privilege. Mr. W. did not see any connec-
tion between the gentleman's premises and his conclusion. Large
cities might desire to be set off into counties, therefore, no pro-
vision ought to be inserted in the constitution to prevent the
destruction of old counties, or the creation of new ones with a
less territory than 400 square miles. He did not see the point,
the pith, of his argument.

But the honorable gentleman, for whom Mr. W. entertained
great respect, in his speech, had abandoned the reasons contained
in his report, and now sought to fortify the action of the committee
by other reasons. What were those reasons? It was said, to fix
the size of counties in the constitution is to deny to the people the
right of petition. Let us look at this argument. We are
about to limit the powers of the Legislature so that it shall not
have power to pass any special acts of incorporation. Some man
desirous of such a privilege may object to the constitution, be-
cause it will destroy the right of petition! Again, we are about to
provide for creating a Governor, but according to the gentleman's
logic, the people will complain, because they are denied the right
to petition against the creation of such an office. Some man may
think we ought not to have a judiciary, and he, too, will complain
that we have denied the right of petition. — He was willing to sub-
mit these statements to the people and abide the result.

Are counties to be made only for the accommodation of a few
people? Are cities, towns, villages, to have the right of organiz-
ing new counties at pleasure? Gentlemen contend that this is a
matter for the people in given limits to decide; why, then, ask the

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 117

Legislature to create new counties? But, Mr. President, the
creation of new counties is a measure of State policy and govern-
ment, for the convenience of the whole people, and not for the
convenience of a few men. The State has to furnish a court for
each new county and pay the expense, to furnish laws, open new
books and new accounts with them. The expenses of the State
depend much upon the number of counties. In the great State
of New York they have but 56 counties, and in Pennsylvania only
58. Have gentlemen ever heard complaint that these powerful
States did not get along well enough with large counties?

But to leave this matter open is to leave a great and important
principle undetermined. Counties are continually agitated and
the people excited upon questions of division. Interested specu-
lators and designing men, in order to accomplish some sinister
object, are continually setting such projects on foot, and they
uniformly beget ill-feeling, suspicion and difficulty. In many in-
stances the people, oppressed with enormous county taxes, are
induced to sign petitions for division, in the hope of obtaining
relief. But when the new county comes to be organized, and they
are called upon to defray the expense of new county buildings,
and support a new set of office-holders, they speedily abandon all
hope of relief. The truth is, the high county taxes and burthens
arise from our defective system of county government, and the
people can obtain relief only by abolishing the county commis-
sioners' court.

Again, men settle in large counties for motives of interest and
pride, they invest their property upon the implied faith that the
county shall not be shorn of its power, or its influence lessened.
Have these men no rights as well as the majority ? It may be that
a large majority of the property holders and taxpayers of a county
may be opposed to a division, ought they to be compelled to pay
the additional expense of supporting a new county at the will of a
bare minority?

As long as this question is left open the Legislature will be con-
tinually harrassed with applications to divide the large counties,
and the time of its members will be consumed in listening to the
petitions and remonstrances, instead of attending to the general
welfare of the people.

ii8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

In every point of view, then, this question ought to be finally
settled. It will relieve the people of the large counties from a load
of doubts and fears, and put at rest, forever, the hopes and antici-
pations of a large number of restless and ambitious speculators.

So long as the counties are large they will have weight and in-
fluence commensurate with their population and wealth; divide
them and you will strip them of their power.

Mr. W. said he gloried in being one of the representatives of a
large county, one whose population was exceeded by but two or
three in the State, and who paid into the State Treasury a larger
sum than any other in the State save one. He should regret to
see that county divided.]-"

Mr. MARKLEY. I move to amend the instructions so as to
read "inquire into the expediency of &c."

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said, that this question was one
of some interest to the people in his county and he desired to
express his views upon it. He only claimed to be the representa-
tive of a single county. The people of that county were nearly
equally divided on the question. He admitted the right of the
people to be heard on this and every subject, but the Convention
had a right also to make such laws as appeared to them the best.
He thought the subject a local one, and not a question of State
government, and should only interest the counties concerned.
He was in favor of re-commitment of the resolutions and that the
committee should wait till they had heard other propositions,
which might be presented by gentlemen, and when they had seen
them and contrasted them one with the other they would be better
able to speak of the question. It was true that something should
be done; but they had better wait and hear all the propositions
that might be offered on the subject.

He was personally opposed to the resolution before them, as
were many of his friends, but he was the representative of the
county — a single county, and not of the whole State, as other
gentlemen claimed to be — and should vote as he considered best
for the interests of that county.

^"The full report of Wead's remarks, as printed in the weekly Illinois
Stale Register of June 25, is here substituted for a brief general summary.

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 119

The subject involved in the debate was not of a general char-
acter, but of a mere local nature. It had been his misfortune since
he had been there, when he had been advocating the interest of
his own county, to differ from the majority. While he admitted
that these petitions for new counties were got up by dishonest men
and speculators in town lots, he did not believe that such was
always the case; and where a case arose where a division would be
proper, he thought the people should have the right to petition
the Legislature in the matter.

Mr. JENKINS inquired of the Chair whether there was any
rule forbidding a committee when reporting to give reasons. He
saw no such rule on the list before him.

The CHAIR replied that there was, but it had been adopted
after the rules had been printed.

Mr. MARKLEY withdrew his amendment.

Mr. LOGAN offered the following amendment to the instruc-
tions:

"And that no county shall be divided, or have any part thereof
stricken off, without submitting the question to a vote of the
people of the county, nor unless a majority of all the legal voters of
the county shall vote for the same."

He thought the Convention should now decide the question.

Mr. GEDDES offered an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. WEST read an amendment, which the Chair ruled to be
out of order at the time.

Mr. SINGLETON said, he had come there to represent the
interest of his constituents. He had come, not to consult their
will but their interests. They would exercise their will themselves.
He scarcely ever got up to address the Convention, but what he
could read in the countenances of gentlemen, speeches upon
retrenchment — about the consumption of time. He did not care
if it should occupy a month in discussing a question when he
thought it demanded it. He thought the restricting the formation
of new counties the best step in retrenchment. They did not see
the dollars uppermost but they were in the back ground. The
question of creating new counties had occupied much of the time
of the Legislature. The resolution which had been before the Con-
vention [had] originally come from his colleague, and the people of

I20 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

their county are much interested in the subject. — The people had
shown their opposition to the creation of more counties, and it
was high time a stop was put to it. It was never too late to do
good. — We are making roads every day, and we do not want the
county seats changed or county lines altered. This matter costs
the State every year Jio,ooo, and he looked upon it as a most
important item. It was a very little object what amount of time
was consumed in the discussion of this subject; but when a man
gets up here he is almost frowned down. What were they to do?
When one of them should go home to his constituents, and they
should ask him why he did not resist this or that proposition,
must he say, "why, it was unpopular in the Convention to make
speeches, and I let it pass" ? This was a perfect cut-throat policy.

Mr. DAVIS, of Montgomery, said, he was in favor of the area
being fixed at 400 square miles. — This would, if the counties were
all of that size, still allow them 140 counties. But he would be in
favor of changing the instruction, so as to have the line to run
within six miles of a county seat, if that would suit the gentleman
who offered them.

Mr. DAVIS, of McLean. Never in the world, sir.

Mr. D., of Montgomery, resumed; when

Mr. MARKLEY called him to order, as he had spoken before
on the subject, and could not now if any other gentleman desired
to speak. No member offering to speak,

Mr. DAVIS said, that he would call the Convention to witness
that he had never spoken more than fifteen minutes at a time, that
he always spoke to the point and no more, and that if he violated
any rule of order he did it unintentionally.

He considered that the people of the whole State were interested
in this matter. The State expenses were increased with every
new county. He did not view it in the same light with those
gentlemen who spoke of the right of petition. We had come here
to act in relation to the judiciary and Legislature, in both of which
the people had an interest, and certainly by so doing they never
thought it was depriving them of any rights.

Mr. CHURCHILL wished to offer some homely, farmer-like
reasons upon the subject. The county seats were often situated
upon small streams, and it was frequently more convenient for

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 121

people to transact their business on the banks of those streams
than in the interior. He was opposed to any law governing the
location of the county seat. He might also speak of the prairies.
Mr. C. then read a series of resolutions on the subject, which he
would have offered if in order at the time.

Mr. TURNBULL made a few remarks and then the Conven-
tion adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. GEDDES withdrew his amendment.

Mr. LOGAN rose to explain the purport of his amendment.
It was not a substitute for the original instructions, but an addi-
tional one. The State of Illinois now had one hundred counties
(and a population of 700,000,) nearly double the number New York
had. She with a population of over two millions had but fifty-six
counties. Pennsylvania had fifty-eight counties, and they were
found sufficient for the administration of justice and the manage-
ment of business. Our Legislature had been continually increasing
the number of counties, sometimes with not more than 1,500 or
2,000 souls in the county. The expenses were always increased
by the formation of new counties, court houses to be built, officers
to be paid, commissioners to be paid &c. There is danger that
the Legislature will go on increasing the number, when there are
now counties that have not sufficient revenue to pay the interest
on their debt. The resolution reaches the desired object to some
extent but not entirely. Even with this provision it will not
prevent an increase. Four hundred square miles is a small
county. Bond is a small county but it has timber and prairie
land, and being well settled is very well. As the matter stood at
present they might reduce an old county to a size which would
not accord with the views of the people of that county.

His amendment guarded against this. Suppose an old county,
depending on the resources of the whole county, should build a
large court house and other buildings, and there was a proposition
to divide it, should the people of that county not have a right to
say whether they were willing to divide or not?

Mr. L. then reviewed the manner in which the petitions for a
division of the counties were generally prepared, and urged the

122 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

adoption of his amendment. He concluded by saying, that he
felt he was incurring no risk in saying that he was unwilling to
give the Legislature no power to divide his county, without giving
the people of that county the privilege of saying whether they
desired the division or not.

Mr. MASON said the question before them was, shall 400
square miles be the area of all new counties to be hereafter formed.
He was a member of the committee who had reported against this
resolution, and he proceeded to give the reasons which had gov-
erned the committee in reporting against the resolution.

He stated that the committee had not acted hastily in the
subject, but had given it much deliberation; they had thought it
better to reject the area of 400 miles because it interfered with the
townships, and there might be counties that would not contain
that amount of territory, and yet would be fully entitled to
organization.

He continued this question at some length, and urged that
population and not territory was the proper basis.

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, begged the gentleman from Sangamon
to withdraw his amendment, and allow him to oflPer a substitute
for the whole; which was done.

Mr. D. said, that these propositions continually coming before
the Legislature for the division of counties was a prolific source of
evil. He had drawn up a substitute for the original instructions,
and in doing so, had an eye to the constitution of Tennessee, in
which was a clause of the same nature as the one now proposed.
He had copied his substitute from that, making only such alter-
ations as were necessary under the circumstances. The constitu-
tion of Tennessee says, the boundary line shall not run within
twelve miles of any county seat; he had substituted ten in his.

That constitution says that two-thirds of the General Assembly
shall concur in making the division: in his substitute he had
left the matter to the people of the county, and not to the Legis-
lature.

It had been argued that there should be no constitutional
provision restraining the people in this question of dividing
counties. Almost every State in the Union has thought it proper
to restrain, by constitutional provision, the forming of new coun-

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 123

ties ad libitum. The constitution of Indiana asserts a general
principle only, in relation to this matter. The constitution of
Ohio provides that no new county shall be formed with a less area
than 400 square miles; that of Tennessee limits the extent of
territory at 350 square miles. And most of the States of the Union
have similar provisions. And then the injustice of these changes
of the county seats: a man buys land near the county seat, and
pays more therefor than he would were the county seat not there,
and the Legislature a few months afterwards moves the county
seat, is it not an act of great injustice to that man? It is, and
should not be tolerated, unless the people of that county had
desired it. He should speak of those persons who got up petitions
and come down here about the Legislature, hanging upon members
to have divisions made, but others had said every thing required,
and it needed no enforcement.

Mr. D. then read some extracts from the constitution of Ten-
nessee in relation to the subject.

Mr. LOGAN said, he was afraid he had got himself into a
scrape by withdrawing his amendment to enable the gentleman to
offer his substitute. He was ready at any time to do almost any-
thing any person asked him, but he would like very much to have
the matter as it was before.

Mr. DAVIS then withdrew his substitute, and the amendment
of Mr. Logan was renewed.

Mr. BLAIR addressed the Convention at some length in
support of the restriction.

Mr. CALDWELL offered to add to the amendment a proviso,
that nothing therein should affect counties already created.

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to lay the proviso on the table.
Carried.

Mr. KENNER oifered an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to lay the whole subject on the table —
yeas 38, nays 113. Lost.

The amendment to the amendment was then laid on the table.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved the previous question,
which was seconded.

Mr. McCALLEN (by leave) said he was a representative of a
small county and much had been said about them. The people

124 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

in his county were patriotic enough to take the offices, no matter
how small the salary. A gentleman had said that the delegates
from large counties brought with them to conventions like this,
more weight, respectability and dignity than those of the small
counties. If so, he wanted his county raised to the dignity
standard.

The amendment was then carried and the instructions as
amended were adopted.

Mr. DEMENT, from the committee on the Legislative
Department, reported a resolution praying instructions to provide
an amendment to the constitution, limiting the number of the
General Assembly to loo members; — 25 senators and 75 repre-
sentatives; and that they should divide the State into districts
upon the basis of the census of 1845, their pay to be fixed at ?2
per day and the sessions limited to 60 days, and to hold their
sessions once in 2 years.

Mr. WORCESTER moved to strike out 25 and insert 20;
strike out 75 and insert 60.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out 60 and insert 40.

Mr. Z. CASEY was in favor of the lowest number named.
He was for economy, retrenchment and reform, in the proper sense
of those words. We should incorporate it into every branch of
the government.

The great reform must be made in the legislative department;
to that branch we trace all our evils. If we had had no Legislature
for the last twelve years we would now be a happy and prosperous
State. He had lost all confidence in an Illinois Legislature. If
we reduced their number to 20 in the Senate and 40 in the House,
one session in two years, and then to be limited to sixty days, their
per diem fixed unalterably in the constitution, then we would
have a business body. We would then be spared the curse of all
Legislatures — local legislation. It might be said that the number
was too low for the dignity of the State. This was not so. He
would compare the numbers 20 and 40, and our population with
the number of the General Assembly of New York, with a popula-
tion of 2,650,000. In the Legislature of that State there were, in
the House, 158 members, and 32 in the Senate. Our representa-
tion, in proportion to the ■ population and upon the same ratio.

FRIDAY, JUNE i8, 1847 125

would be 27 in the House and Senate in proportion. In no way
could we insure economy and reform so well as by incorporating
such a provision. He would rather give one vote for such a
proposition than make twenty speeches on retrenchment.

Mr. MINSHALL said, he did not know whether he should
vote to strike out or not. He was much surprised to hear the
motion to strike out 75 and insert a smaller number. He had
always been taught from his youth that the House of Representa-
tives— the popular branch — should be large; not so large as to be
unwieIdly[j?V], but sufficiently large to avoid corruption. Illinois was
always running from one extreme to the other. Forty is a very
small number, and he thought the House should be large. They
might make the Senate as small and aristocratic as they thought
proper, but leave the House large. The gentleman had said he
had lost all confidence in an Illinois Legislature. He would ask
him if a small body of 40 could not more easily be corrupted than
a larger one? He was willing to agree with the report of the com-
mittee.

Mr. WHITNEY advocated the report of the committee, and
the number fixed by them.

Mr. KITCHELL was in favor of the report of the committee,
except so far as related to districting the State. This, he thought,
should be left to the Legislature.

Mr. ROUNTREE advocated a larger number than recom-
mended by the committee.

Mr. HARVEY thought the number fixed by the committee
was about right. If the number should be fixed at 40, every
representative would have a constituency of 20,000 persons; if
fixed at 75, he would have something over 10,000.

Mr. DEMENT said, that the committee had carefully weighed
all the proposed numbers to constitute the Legislature. They had
estimated the proportion of the population to each representative,
according to the various numbers that had been submitted, and
had, after due deliberation, and a careful enquiry into the many
difficulties attending a smaller number, agreed upon what had
been just reported. He continued this branch of the subject at
much length. He also said that the cost of the State for the pay
of the members and officers of the last Legislature had been

1 26 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

$69,000; add to this, 1 1,800 for stationery, and some $230 for fuel,
and it carried it over $70,000. The plan proposed, at $2 per day,
and limiting the sessions at 60 days, the pay of the members and
officers would amount to $11,778, a saving in this item alone, of
$58,900. By fixing the pay of the members at $3 per day, the
highest amount he had heard mentioned, there still, by adopting
the other reforms proposed by the committee, would be a saving
of $53,500; and this was not a small amount.

Mr. D. continued the subject at considerable length, but owing
to the late hour at which the Convention adjourned we are un-
able to insert a more extended report of his remarks, which were
listened to with great attention.

The Convention then adjourned.

XI. SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847

The question pending at the adjournment yesterday was on
striking out the words "twenty-five" and "seventy-five" in the
resolution reported by Mr. Dement from the committee on
the Legislative Department. This resolution provided that the
General Assembly should consist of seventy-five representatives
and twenty-five senators.

Mr. ARCHER said that he was constrained to concur with
the committee and oppose the amendment. He was aware that the
people were in favor of a reduction of the number of representa-
tives, but he believed they were not prepared to sanction so great
a reduction as that proposed by the gentleman from JeflFerson,
(Mr. ScATEs). He had great respect for the opinions of that
gentleman, but he thought he (Mr. S.) was in advance of the
public sentiment.

Small bodies are more liable to corruption than larger bodies,
whilst the latter are liable to prolong the sessions of the General
Assembly and subject the State to heavy expenses. He thought
these two extremes should be avoided, and that the number
suggested by the committee was a proper medium between the
two. He would rather have the General Assembly too large than
too small, for the reason that popular liberty was the safest in the
hands of a numerous representation.

The State of New York had been referred to as an example,
but he thought it was not applicable to our condition and State
organization. In New York the population is more compact, and
the number of counties much smaller than in Illinois. If we
follow their example, one member will represent four or five
counties, thus placing the representative at too great a distance
from his constituents, which he thought was impolitic if not
dangerous.

If the number recommended by the committee is adopted, a
reduction of sixty-two members will have been made, which re-
duction, he thought, was all that the people expected or desired.
127

128 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

He thought that each county should have a representative, so that
he may be acquainted, not only with a part, but all his constitu-
ents, and faithfully represent their interests and reflect their will.

Again, it is impolitic to go from one extreme to another. Here-
tofore the General Assembly had been too large, and delay and
excessive expenditures have been the consequence. Now it is
proposed to reduce the number to sixty. He thought that the
people were not prepared for so sudden and momentous a transition.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that he thought the number
proposed by the committee was too small. The great cry has
always been that the Legislature was too large, and to this cause
has been attributed many, if not most, of the evils which were
known to exist. But this was not the source of these evils. They
proceeded from the excessive power given to the Legislature.
Mr. D. then spoke at some length about candidates for office and
individuals seeking favors of the Legislature, hanging about the
lobbies and consuming the time of members, and entangling them
in schemes for individual benefit, to the detriment of the public
interests. Let these things be guarded against and there will be
no complaints about delay and expense;

He hoped that there would be a county representation, so that
the larger counties could not overshadow the smaller. The organ-
ization of the United States Senate was based upon this principle.
If, said Mr. D., New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio, had a repre-
sentation in the Senate according to their population they would
almost have the entire control of the Union. He asked if it might
not operate in some such way here, if the representation should
be based upon population alone. Could not the larger cities and
towns on the lakes and navigable rivers overshadow the less popu-
lous and more humble neighboring counties?

We should have an eye to the future as well as the present.
In 1840, we had 250,000 inhabitants; in 1845 we had 700,000. Is
it right to fix the apportionment to suit these counties that are
settled, leaving those that are not settled unprovided for. He
was opposed to giving large counties an undue and unjust power
over smaller ones, and he advocated a larger number than that
recommended by the committee.

Mr. DALE said, there was so great a difference in the views of

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 129

gentlemen, as to the number of which the General Assembly should
consist, varying from 80 to 120, some members desiring even
greater numbers than these, and some less, that the committee,
by way of conciliation, adopted a medium number and reported
to this convention the number of one hundred.

The last General Assembly having been composed of 162
members, the reduction to one hundred, as proposed by the report,
would be a reduction of more than one-third of the number which
composed the last General Assembly.

This is, indeed, a great stride in the system of retrenchment;
and if this number should be adopted by the Convention, as also
the recommendation of the same committee as to the pay of
members of the Legislature, there would be a saving to the State,
at each session of the Legislature, of near sixty thousand dollars;
a sum, which though small, yet if properly expended, would go
some way towards retrieving the credit of the State.

But though the saving, by this retrenchment of the number in
the General Assembly, should be large, yet if this saving is eflFected,
by losing sight of, or trenching upon the first principles of repre-
sentative republics, it were a saving of doubtful expediency. In
the legislation of these governments the views, wishes and feelings
of the people should he. fully and properly represented. This can
be done only by allowing to each county at least one representative.

The intercourse and acquaintance of the people with each other
are, most generally, limited and bounded by county lines. They
attend at the county seats of their own counties, courts, meetings,
conventions, &c., and by constant intercourse and interchange of
views and sentiments, they so assimilate, that frequently county
lines are the lines of opposite views, habits and wishes.

In order, then, to a proper representation, each county should
have its representative. Our State, however, is, unfortunately
cut up into small counties, that such a representation might be
considered unwieldly and burthensome; and as it is highly probable
that no larger number will be adopted by this convention, and as
the division between the two houses, of the number reported by
the committee, seems to be in proper proportion, he should sus-
tain the report of the committee. But,[at the same time, he would
say, that when this matter comes properly before the people, and ''

I30 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

those counties which, under former apportionments, were always
entitled to a separate representative, shall, to elect one represent-
ative, find themselves attached to smaller counties, and those
smaller counties shall find their votes swallowed up in the votes of
the larger counties, there will be complaint.

As, however, an amendment may hereafter be made, providing
for an increase of this number when the people may vote for such
an increase, he would forego his wishes and feelings and vote in
favor of the committee's report .

Mr. BROCKMAN said, that he was opposed to the amend-
ment. He advocated a large representation. Every county
ought to have a representative. He thought that the Convention
should have an eye to those who should come after us. Geography,
said Mr. B., does not present a richer valley than that of the
Mississippi, and there is no State in that valley equal to Illinois.
It possesses a variety of climate and soil unparalleled. It has
also a variety of interests which must be attended to, or we shall
descend into an aristocracy.

We have a State capable of sustaining a population of 18,000,-
000. Massachusetts had a population of ninety souls to the
square mile. In the same proportion Illinois would sustain a
population of 5,000,000. Is the number proposed by the amend-
ment sufficient to represent 5,000,000? Would one representative
to 60,000 or 70,000 souls be sufficient? By this system one
member would represent six or seven bodies corporate. It has
been proposed to increase the number of county commissioners,
because three men cannot do the business, yet in the same breath
it is proposed to lessen the number of representatives. He saw
no propriety or wisdom in this.

If each county shall not be provided with a representative,
none but lawyers can get into the Legislature. They travel from
county to county, and possess facilities for extending their
acquaintance, which are entirely out of the reach of farmers and
other classes, whose pursuits confine them at home on their farms
and in their shops. If each county is allowed a representative,
individuals, other than lawyers, can find their way to the Legis-
lature, for they will be well known throughout their own county.

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 131

Mr. McCALLEN advocated at some length the adoption of
the county representative system.

[Mr. McCALLEN said he did not rise to inflict a speech upon
the Convention, but briefly to give his views upon the matter
now under consideration, for he regarded it as being a subject of
momentous import to the welfare of the people. It seemed to be
the disposition of every gentleman in the Convention to carry out
what they were pleased to term retrenchment and reform. He
would be sorry to doubt the sincerity of gentlemen; he was dis-
posed to attribute to them the same honesty of purpose, the same
generosity of motive which he claimed for himself. But, continued
Mr. McCallen, are they not mistaken in the means by which
this economy and this retrenchment are to be brought about?

It seems to be the disposition of the majority, to leave all the
important questions which are discussed here open for the decision
of the people themselves, or for the future action of the legislature.
What, sir, was it that caused the people to call us together? Was
it not to settle these questions? To settle and determine princi-
ples at least? Why then will not gentlemen take the responsibil-
ity of settling those questions which they were sent here to
determine; and embody them in the constitution? Gentlemen have
assembled here to remedy certain evils, yet they seem most
anxious to shift the responsibility from their shoulders, for fear,
perhaps, that they might not be able to return again.

With all due deference to the Hon. member from Jefferson,
(for there is not a member in this assembly who has a more ex-
alted opinion of his patriotism, and his distinguished talents, than
I have; but is not the gentleman as liable to err as some of the
rest of us?) I entirely disagree with that honorable gentleman,
in regard to his proposed reduction of the General Assembly.
The proposition which the gentleman is in favor of, as I under-
stood him, is that the legislature shall be reduced to forty mem-
bers in the House and twenty in the Senate, in order that we may
retrench and economize the expenses of this government. Might
not the expenses of the government be better retrenched, and
economized, by setting limits to the action of the legislature?
By saying to the legislature, thus far thou shalt go, and no farther?

132 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

If we contend for the principle of a democratic, responsible gov-
ernment, let us carry it out; and I ask this convention, if that
principle can be carried out, by limiting the representation in this
hall to forty members? If it can, I am prepared to go still fyrther
than the gentleman from Brown, who preceded me in this debate.
If forty members can do the business of this State, if the great
and important interests of the people can be intrusted to so small
a number, — why not bring it down at once to the standard of
Napoleon's republic; reduce it to a council of three, and have an
aristocratic government, an oligarchy at once? It has been very
properly suggested here, that the interests of the smaller counties
will be swallowed up by the greater, in the indulgence of that love
of power which is inherent in the human breast; that as nothing
but an imaginary line divides them, the interests of the smaller
counties will be absorbed and swallowed up by the larger. True,
sir, there is danger; and yet within those lines there are feelings
of local interest, feelings which attach every man to his own
county. — The same feeling which produces State pride, or pride
of country, will operate in regard to counties. State lines are
merely imaginary, yet who does not hold his own State first in his
affections? The same principle will hold good when we refer to
Europe; imaginary lines, only, separate nations, and yet those
nations are arrayed in hostile attitude against each other. Sir,
if you would in accordance with your professions, protect the
rights of the weak against the encroachments of the powerful,
then let your small counties be protected in the enjoyment of
their privileges. Each county in itself possesses a kind of minor
sovereignty; that sovereignty should be represented, and respect-
ably represented in this house. It is said that gentlemen who
came from small counties, should not be entitled to the same
respect and consideration as those who represent larger ones. If
this is to be the decree regarding this thing, let gentlemen openly
avow it. Let them not come here sailing under false colors. Let
them not come here under the color of democracy, and say that
that class to which I belong, those whom they opprobriously style
"blue light federalists," and "Mexican whigs," are those who
are trampling on the rights and interests of the people. Let them
come out under their true colors, and if they are disposed to pro-

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 133

tect the interests of the great mass of the democracy of this
country, let them show it by acts and not by words. I am clearly
of opinion with the gentleman from Brown, that should we adopt
this policy, and reduce the number of representatives to forty, it
will drive from these halls the representatives of that very class,
on whose behalf so much is said, and so many professions made;
it will prevent the hard-fisted yeomanry of the country from ever
attaining a seat in your legislative halls. It will shut out from
participating in the legislation of the State the farmer, the me-
chanic, and if you please the merchant, whose interest and whose
welfare are preached from every stump. Another class of men
must fill your legislature, if this principle be adopted; and what
class will it be?

It has been truly remarked by the gentleman from Brown,
that it will be the lawyers, the nabobs of the country; men who
can roll in their coaches; whilst the poor man, the farmer, the
mechanic, though he may have the embryo talent lurking in his
brain of a Clay, a Webster, or a Calhoun, is ruthlessly deprived
of all chance of ever arriving at that niche in the temple of fame,
which his inherent talent would otherwise give him the capability
of attaining. If we are going to be democratic, let us give every
county in the State a representative. — But, perhaps, gentlemen
have promised reform, which they now find it somewhat incon-
venient to carry out; they have promised more, perhaps, than it
is agreeable to them to carry out.

For my own part, I came here bound by no pledges; I am free
as the air of heaven. That I am honored with a seat here, is but
the triumph of the principles by which I am governed, and not
because I was willing to subscribe to what appeared to be the
wishes of a majority. Rather than beg a seat here, in order to
carry out doctrines which I disapproved, rather than do this, I
would dig my political grave deeper than the very caves of the
ocean. The people whom I have the honor to represent are not
willing that their right of suffrage — that their right of represen-
tation here, should be balanced against a paltry sum of dollars
and cents. There are questions arising, and always will be, in
the progress of the development of the resources of this country,
and in the further arrangement of the State, that will require local

134 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

legislation; and is there a county, in view of this fact, that will
not be willing to pay the expenses of a member, rather than be
deprived of the services of a representative in the legislature?
And another great difficulty which has been raised by many gen-
tlemen on this floor, is this sectional feeling, this county pride.
Range two or three of these counties side by side — let them send
one representative to the legislature, and which among them will
be most neglected? — Undoubtedly the smallest. The main in-
terest of the whole will be laid aside, party politics even will be
laid aside, and these local questions are the ones that will
be agitated. These are not freaks of the imagination. I come from
a county which never sent a representative to the legislature, and
it was only by a piece of good fortune that your humble servant
obtained a seat here. lA laugh.] Though I would be decidedly
opposed to a curtailment of the representation, yet if gentlemen
persist in curtailing down to the small number proposed, for the
purpose of economizing — if a saving of dollars and cents is to be
the word — I will go further than they. I will say clothe your
executive with imperial functions, put the imperial crown upon
his head, and carry out your doctrine in its utmost rigor. Deny
the people the right of representation in the legislature, — send
forth from this august body a constitution that will give to your
large counties clustered around the centre the full power of the
whole State, and I pledge you my life that the people will respond
to your acts in a way that will be most unwelcome. The people's
rights are not to be bought and sold.

But gentlemen may enquire, what would be my proposition.
If we must have a conservative department in this government,
in order to check the power of the others; make the most numerous
body of the legislature that conservative department; let the
sovereignty of every county in the State, which is able to carry
on a county government be represented; then, select your Sen-
ators according to the population of the country. It has been
justly remarked by the gentleman from Bond, that the conserva-
tive character of the Senate of the United States has more than
once saved this republic; and I entirely concur with the gentleman.
Give the numerous body of the legislature this conservative power
and we shall save perhaps the character of this rapidly growing

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 135

State. Concentrate the power around the capital of the State,
and you at once have a civil government, more odious in its char-
acter than was ever the consolidated government of Santa Anna;
the bordering counties having no more voice in the legislature
than if placed beyond the Mississippi; swallowed up by the con-
solidated power collected around your capitol. — Is this what the
people expect from a democratic convention? Is this the kind
of democratic doctrine which gentlemen come here to advocate?
Do they not place themselves in the position of the Jay, who had
borrowed the feathers of the Peacock? Let me tell the gentle-
men, there is a breeze of intelligence sweeping over the broad
savannah's of this land, that will scatter their brilliant plumes and
leave them in their naked deformity. Principles will be test
words, and party names will be unknown. I do not intend to
consume much of the time of the Convention; I did not come here,
as I said on another occasion, deeply learned in the law, yet my
constituents thought me not unworthy of a seat in this assembly,
and whenever their interests are to be sacrificed upon the alter of
penuriousness, than I am to be found battling in their cause. I
am not going to sit quietly in my seat, and see the little county
which bears the name of that glorious hero, who shed his blood
upon the field of Buena Vista, sacrificed to serve the purposes of
the democracy of the State.]^'

Mr. LOUDON said, that he had just come into the Convention,
and desired to say a few words on the question, though he did not
exactly know what the question was. His constituents were
interested in the matter. He had long thought of the matter. It
had occurred to him in days past that the Legislature was entirely
too large. He had heard the people say so, particularly in the
south part of the State. Their sessions were entirely used for
log-rolling, &c., which took up a great deal of time, and, therefore,
the sessions were too long. He was for a sufficient number, in the
Legislature, to carry on the business of government and no more.
So far as his county was concerned, he was satisfied that not one
could be found who was not in favor of reducing the number to

" This account of McCallen's speech is taken from the Sangamo Journal,
June 22.

136 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

50 in the House and 25 in the Senate. The committee had
reported 75 and 25, and he did not know but that he would vote
for striking out. He lived in a small county which would lose a
representative, and he had the best feeling for his county and her
people, but still he would vote to reduce the number of represent-
atives. It might be said that Illinois required a greater number
in her Legislature to represent the interests of all her people; but
he would introduce the State of Tennessee, who [sic] had a much
larger population than Illinois, and a much smaller representation
in her Legislature. Much had been said of retrenchment, and
he was of opinion that this was a proper way to make it; in fact,
the only way to retrench the expenses of the State was to curtail
the number of representatives in the Legislature, then reduce their
per diem, and then there would be a great saving to the State.
This was the only way that it could be done. He had introduced
a resolution some weeks ago on this subject, which had expressed
his views and the views of his constituents.

But there was apparently a great anxiety, on the part of some
gentlemen, that if the number of representatives should be
reduced, and several counties put into one district, that they
would never get back to the Legislature. He lived in a small
county, and one which, if this reduction should pass, would lose a
representative, yet he would rather have the honor to represent
three or four counties than one. It was no great thing to
get into the Legislature! Much better to keep out of it. If he
could get elected from a large district, composed of several good
sized and respectable counties, why, then he would consider himself
a respectable member.

It was all a chance to get into the Legislature anyhow. If a
man was respectable and popular in his own county now, and
would do everything to keep up that character after he was put
into a large district, and let the people then see him and know
him, he would stand the same chance, and might be elected.
Gentlemen should not be afraid. Young men who are now
squirming and trembling about the loss of their chances to get
back to the Legislature, should remember that the old ones will
die, and get other places, &c., and that they will, in time, have

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 137

all the chances. Many who are now in will die, and they will be
elected to fill their places. That was his only hope.

Mr. PINCKNEY said, that if those gentlemen who were afraid
of not getting back to the Legislature would quietly wait till the
old ones would die, it would be the better course. He did not
know how others felt, but for himself he had not been much
enlightened by the speeches of gentlemen upon the principles
upon which governments were formed, and even if they had gone
back to Greece and Rome, and informed us how their governments
had been established, he did not think the result would be much
different. He had read all about them in his youth, but did not
think he could enlighten the Convention upon the subject at
present.

His reasons for rising at all were to have a vote upon the
question at once. He would prefer the number to be 80 instead
of 75, and that number, he was of opinion, was not too large, but
he did not desire to have the number more than that. He thought
but little of the argument that small bodies were more easily
corrupted than large ones. If this were the case, how came it
that the people themselves were corrupted when they met en
masse. They were there swayed to and fro by some one man —
an orator — who, by appealing to their feelings and passions,
carried them like a wave backward and forward. If the number
and pay be reduced, it is said that poor men will not be able to
canvass the districts. Well, he did not care if men never can-
vassed the districts, making stump speeches, log-rolling, and using
every means to procure their election. He would not care if this
were all broken up. The people of his county were willing to pay
men a reasonable compensation for their services in the Legisla-
ture— not too high nor too low.

Mr. WORCESTER withdrew his motion to strike out the
numbers proposed by the committee and insert less ones.

Mr. SCATES advocated the motion made yesterday by him
to strike out the numbers proposed by the committee. In doing
so he said, that he hoped no one desired to "question" gentlemen
down who were disposed to present their views to the Convention
on this subject. He was astonished to hear gentlemen say, when
great constitutional questions were before them, that there ought

138 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

to be no more discussion. He had objected, last week, to long
discussion upon a very trifling matter of dollars and cents. But
now, gentlemen who have spoken themselves, like a man after a
feast, think no one hungry because they are satisfied. Gentlemen
had also indulged in personal remarks, in sarcasm, and ridicule of
those whom they were disposed to silence. He had shared largely
in these. In reply, he had only to say, as Job said to his com-
forters, "miserable comforters ye are," and he would add, with
Job, also, "ye are the people and wisdom will die with you." His
colleague (Mr. Z. Casey) had been made to say, by one of the
gentlemen who had spoken, that he had lost all confidence in an
Illinois Legislature because they had become corrupt. His
colleague did not say that he had lost all confidence in the Legis-
lature because it was corrupt. He (Mr. S.) had lost all confidence
in an Illinois Legislature, because he had lost confidence in its
ever adopting retrenchment and reform; he had lost confidence in
it because of its organization. He had no confidence in it when
it went on increasing its number till it had reached 162.

Mr. MINSHALL explained, that he had put no such construc-
tion upon the language of the gentleman from Jefferson.

Mr. SCATES. Let it pass, then, I so understood the gentle-
man to represent my colleague. When interrupted, he was about
saying that he had known candidates for the Legislature to canvass
their counties, and pledge themselves to carry out retrenchment
and reform, and to be elected. Yet these same men, who, when
they came here, were resolved to carry out their pledges, have
been voted down, and, until finding they were unable to do so,
have abandoned the object. When he saw this, he could well say
that he had lost all confidence in the Legislature. The Legislature
was too large, and he greatly feared that in this body of 162
members it would be found impracticable to carry out the prin-
ciples of economy and retrenchment. When he had opposed the
scheme to economize one-half dollar in the pay of the clerks and
doorkeepers of this House, he did so because he did not think it
was in our power to pass a resolution of the kind, and that the
subject was too insignificant. Now there was a great opportunity
to introduce retrenchment into the government, and gentlemen
who had made speeches then upon economy had now an oppor-

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 139

tunity of showing their sincerity. Let them vote for the smallest
number. He was told that lUinoians were too proud to pay a
poll tax. This pride would be our ruin. When we propose to
economize in the legislative department we are told that the
people of Illinois are too proud to submit; that they will never
consent to mingle counties into districts, and that the county lines
must be kept up. And this, too, when we were not in a condition
to pay the interest on our debt. He was prepared to show that
we could add to the funds for the liquidation of our debt, by this
proposed reduction of the number and pay of the members of the
Legislature, and that, too, in considerable amount, without any
increase of taxation. — The expenses of the last Legislature
amounted — including per diem, mileage, printing of laws, station-
ery, fuel and other expenses — to $77,659.59. — This was for
the Legislature composed of 162 members. Now the question
was, how much could we retrench of this sum, without injuring
the public interest? Mr. S. then read several tabular statements
showing the reduction in the amount of expenses of the Legislature
that would follow the adoption of a smaller delegation, and the
annual saving to the State. We give the substance. The cost
of a session of the Legislature, composed of 60 members, allowed
$2 per day — session limited to 60 days — would be $13,766.14.
This compared with the last Legislature would be a deduction of
$63,872.91. The printing would be reduced, the stationery
and the number of laws would be reduced. Thus there would be
an annual saving of over $31,891, to go to the payment of our
interest on the State debt, without any further taxation. The
expenses, at the same rates, of a house of 70 members, would be
$15,500 — and the saving would be about $30,000 a year. At 80
in the Legislature, the expenses would be $16,500, and the annual
saving would be nearly $30,000. — Fix the number at 100 members,
and the cost would be $19,000, a yearly saving of $28,500. This
was a considerable saving, which, under the present circumstances
of the State, it was very desirable should be made.

But if gentlemen would calculate the difference between
the cost and expense that would be incurred by having one hundred
members in the Legislature, with that of the number proposed by
him — sixty — they would find that in thirty years it would amount

I40 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

to 1 144,000. He had no hopes that in thirty years our debt would
be paid, yet he thought that our creditors would be rejoiced to
hear that in that time they would receive that amount. Suppose
they were to ask us, would we not pay them $140,000 in thirty
years, would not we be glad to have it in our power to promise
them we would? They are now here in the lobby looking upon
your actions, they are watching whether we will suffer any oppor-
tunity of saving money to pay them their dues to pass by without
embracing it. Look at them and think of the large claims they
hold against the State, and forget your constituents. — Do not
oppose it because you have too much pride to allow your
county to lose a representative. Gentlemen say that 60
members cannot legislate for the whole State of Illinois; cannot
represent her different interests. How do seven members in
Congress so well represent this large areaof territory and advance
the interests of the people? When they say that one man cannot
know and represent the sentiments of several counties is not
correct, if so, what becomes of the propriety of your present sena-
torial districts ? New York has an extent of territory of 47,000
square miles, but little less than our own. We have a population
of 670,000, and New York has 1,968,000. New York has fixed as
a ratio of representation 11,000 to a delegate. She has a popula-
tion of 43 to a square mile. Illinois has only 3. Her legislature
is composed of only 163 members to represent her large and
diversified interests. She has agricultural, manufacturing and
commercial interests. We have but one — agriculture. Our popu-
lation is not so diversified, we have but little mechanical, and
comparatively no manufacturing interests. We have but one
principal interest to be represented, and that is agriculture.
Gentlemen have cited New York as a model. They were willing
to follow New York in every thing. If New York adopts a bad
system of general banking, they immediately gave up and adopted
it. N. York had adopted it and the matter was settled. New
York had a vast amount of revenue arising from the canals; it had
a large amount of taxable property. Illinois had not been, and
at the present time was not, able to pay the interest on its
debt. She was emphatically able to owe it. He would call their
attention to the State of New Jersey, which had a population of

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 141

520,000, and she has a limit in her constitution upon the number
of her Legislature to 60. Is New Jersey in debt, or unwilling to
pay what she owes, or suspected ofa design to swindle her creditors?
No; but she has thought proper to guard against a too large and
extravagant Legislature, and is an example we might safely follow.
Pennsylvania has provided that her legislative body shall not
exceed one hundred. Are we willing under our circumstances to
go up to the same limit with the great State of Pennsylvania, with
so many diversified interests. We are still issuing large
numbers of Auditor's warrants to pay these members, they are
floating all over the State at a depreciated value. You may
knock in vain at the doors of your treasury for their redemption.
And now there will be a large amount, say ^50,000, issued to pay for
this Convention. And gentlemen are talking of paying the
State debt, when they are unwilling to reduce the number of the
Legislature, and reduce the fast growing amount of Auditor's
warrants. Let us go to another State that has prospered under
her legislation, and which would be a more proper model for us
than New York. Go to Ohio. A State with a large population
engaged in agriculture, literature, commerce and every branch of
trade. Her march has been onward. And she has limited her
Legislature to seventy-two — I am told it is eighty-two. Admit
it, but compare her population to the square mile with ours; her
prosperity with ours; and the number of her Legislature with ours.
The constitution of that State says the number may be as low as 36.
If we follow the example of any State, I think we should follow
that State. Indiana has limited her number to one hundred.
Shall we step at once to the maximum? Let gentlemen
adopt the lowest number now, and let the Legislature advance to
the maximum when our population shall have increased and our
State has not creditors. Louisiana has an immense commerce
compared with Illinois, yet this State — the great cotton State —
has fixed her maximum at sixty-four members of the Legislature.
And we are scouted at when we propose to reduce our number to
the same. Alabama has fixed the limit of her Legislature to one
hundred, and I believe is now legislating with a less number.
That State has a territory of 50,000 square miles. The State of
Maine has a larger ratio of representatives than any State in the

142 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Union. Her limit is not below one hundred, nor above two
hundred; but in that State, and I believe in most of the New
England States, they allow every town a representative, the town
or county paying all expenses of the members. Arkansas has
limited the number to one hundred. — Missouri, too, has adopted
the same number. She is larger in territory than Illinois, and
though her population is less, the interests of her people are more
diversified. She has a larger commercial and a mineral inter-
est to be represented. He thought that if because the State
had been heretofore cut up into an extravagant number of counties
we were to allow each county a representative in the Legislature,
we had better go to work and organize the State over again. Did
you notice the touchiness of the gentleman from Hardin? A
county that has ever had a representative will never surrender it;
the people are too proud to submit to it. Illinoians had become
so proud because they had had a chance to fight and fought well,
that they won't pay taxes, is another fact of the gentleman. They
had been favored with panegyrics upon their brave who had
fallen, and upon the fighting of their troops. Fighting was one
thing and paying taxes another; and collectors when they called
on the people for the amount of their tax would not be put off by
these answers, which gentlemen put into their mouths. Our
character, as a State anxious and desirous to adopt every means
in our power to pa.y our debt, will be served abroad by our reducing
the number of our Legislature, and the amount of our expenses.
I hope, for the saving of $144,000 in thirty years — the probable
length of time this constitution will continue in force — gentlemen
will adopt the number I have proposed. It is also said, that
members won't serve for $1 a day; they get men in the State of
Kentucky to perform the duties of legislators for that sum. The
expenses of the last Legislature are yet unpaid, the warrants for
them are in circulation yet; moreover, there were Jioo,ooo appro-
priated besides, by the Legislature, all of which are yet out and
unpaid.

We could easily see the reduction that could be made, were we
to have a called session.

The people of my county say the Convention was called too
soon; that the day of confirmation is fixed too soon, and I would

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 143

prefer that the election should take place so as the result might be
known just before the August elections of next year. He hoped
the Convention would, in justice to the honor of the State, and to
wipe off the suspicion of a design to cheat that now hangs over us,
go for the reduction of the number. Now is the time. All the
people demand it. All speak of retrenchment, and here is an
opportunity to accomplish it.

Mr. HARDING. The county I represent has a desire to have
a representative in the Legislature. The last number proposed
will deprive us of all chance of a member. We have a population
of 6,000 and the Legislature has attached us to Knox county.
Knox county has a population of 10,000, and they give her one
member. Knox and Warren are entitled to one member, and we
have to depend on the magnanimity of the people of Knox whether
we ever have a member from our county or not. Population is
not the fairest basis of representation, it should be taxation and
territory. All counties have an interest as counties — a county
interest, and it should be represented. Sangamon, for instance,
has an interest, a county interest, a Sangamon interest, which is
very different from that of any other county. They, in apportion-
ing, throw the fraction from large counties and attach it to a
smaller county, and this is unfair. The gentleman from Jefferson
may well speak of reducing the representation. His county has
two representatives, and pays but |i,2SO a year for taxes. Warren
county pays $4,000. Jackson county pays $1,800 for taxes and
has a representative and a half, we pay $4,000 and have none. Let
every county have one member. Go to Pennsylvania, her con-
stitution says that every county shall have a representative, no
matter what the population is. Take Cook county, I can see the
time when Chicago will have a population of 100,000, and then
take a small agricultural county which has no representative, but
is thrown in with Cook, what change of the agricultural interest
being represented there?

Jackson and Williamson counties have a large extent of terri-
tory but they pay no tax. The rule of putting several counties
into one senatorial district, is well enough, because the Senate is
the conservative branch.

Give every county a representative, and you will avoid all

144 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

complaints about gerrymandering. A large extent of territory
requires a larger representation than a large population. The
Legislature is to make laws for all the counties, and if the small
counties are deprived of their representatives, they have no voice
in the assessment of taxes. In the proposed plan property is
thrown out of view. He who has property has an interest in the
country, and the greater part of the taxes comes from the landhold
interest. There are those who are engaged in professions and other
occupations who derive large incomes and who pay no taxes, but
are fully represented under the population basis.

Mr. LOUDON said, he must reply to some of the remarks of
the gentleman who had been somewhat personal. He said prop-
erty should be the basis of representation. He steps down to
Jackson and Williamson and there makes some calculations; he
then steps up to Cook and there was quite unfortunate. If he
carries his principle of a property representation into operation as a
basis, he would, standing alongside Cook county, soon find himself
like a musquito [sic] in the stern wheel of a steamboat. He
(Mr. L.) was from a poor county, and was one of the poorest of the
poor in that county, yet, he, and the people of his county, were
perfectly willing to run the chance of being united with other
counties and of having a joint representative. Gentlemen should go
into the canvass then as into a game, take all the chances, enter into
the spirit of the game. Let him present himself as a candidate; the
people will ask him is he qualified to go to the Legislature. He
answers, I think I am; then the people will say, we'll examine you
and see if you are. Let him go then into the contest, and if he
struggles, if he has hope, even as large as a grain of mustard seed,
he can remove anything, he can remove mountains. Let him go
to Williamson county, and he will find that there are as many
there, who are as anxious to go to the Legislature as anywhere else.
Don't be discouraged; don't be frightened at the chances of not
getting back. The argument of gentlemen don't hold good, sup-
pose you do give every county a representative, the large counties
will then have more — two or three — in proportion and the small
counties will be in exactly the same minority. No man repre-
senting several counties dare neglect to represent the interests of
the small ones.

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 145

He need not be afraid of gerrymandering, there will not be any
more of that in one way than in another. Though Williamson
county is poor and her population is small, she has raised some
cute chaps, who, when they grow up, move off into other parts of
the State and become rich; they cannot get rich down there. Let
them put Williamson county along with some others and give them
all one representative, why, there will be a number of candidates
from all counties, and the longest pole will knock the most per-
simmons. All the people required was a sufficient number in the
Legislature to do the business, and a surplus was just as great a
nuisance as any other article on a man's hands for which there
was no demand.

A motion was made to adjourn till Monday next.

Mr. CHURCHILL demanded the yeas and nays. Which were
ordered.

Mr. HURLBUT and others appealed to him to withdraw the
demand, that the object was to enable the committees to hold
their meetings; the demand not being withdrawn, the motion was
withdrawn, and the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. WHITNEY differed from the gentleman who had said
there was a manifest desire on the part of the Convention to close
the debate on the question. He thought not. Retrenchment
and reform had been sounded in his ears so much, had been the
subject of so many gentlemen's speeches, that he even heard
retrenchment and reform at the corner of the streets. It was now
proposed to carry out retrenchment and reform by depriving the
people of the right of representation, the grand characteristic of a
free government, and the most sacred of all privileges, and that
for the purpose of paying the public debt in thirty years. He was
certain the people would pay every dollar of the debt; they were
anti-repudiators; they desired to pay it, but not by giving up their
right of representation. He did not think that the debt could be
paid in thirty years, nor would any one there now,^who might live
thirty years, see the debt paid. He was no repudiator,^he paid
his taxes and would continue to do so, but would never consent to
give up any of the people's right to be heard in their legislative

146 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

halls. He was opposed at the time, to the passage of the act by
which that debt had been created. It had been said that it was
unwise legislation. He thought so too, but knowing well the
manoeuvering that had been practised by people about here to
procure the passage of that bill, he was greatly of opinion that the
Legislature that made the law was not only unwise but a little
corrupt. Unwise they certainly were. He did not care if the
State creditors were in the lobby looking at the acts of the Conven-
tion. He had heard the same cry before, when the great internal
improvement bill was before them. Then it was said that the
capitalists were here in the lobby with the money in their hands
and that the eyes of the world were upon us to see if we would be
such fools as to let that opportunity pass by, of enriching our State
by means of canals and railroads, &c. I am unwilling, even for
the purpose of paying the debt, to say that a republican form of
government shall be abandoned. To forego the right of repre-
sentation to pay men, who were as much to blame for the creation
of that debt as we are. How are we to save this $144,000 in
thirty years? — by cutting down the number of representatives of
the people.'' He would not even say he was willing to cut down
the pay of the members of the Legislature to %i a day — %"! a day
in Auditor's warrants! Farmers and mechanics who may come
here cannot afford to pay for board equal to what they have on
their own table, at that rate. He would go for restricting the
amount they should receive each session. If gold and silver were
paid, then there might be something saved, but not when they
were paid in Auditor's warrants. I hope to see no longer the
sheriffs running about the counties, buying up the Auditor's
warrants with the gold and silver they received from the people's
pockets for taxes, and then making returns in the warrants. New
York had been cited. N. Y. was his native State and he loved her,
but he loved Illinois more; if a good plan was proposed he did not
care where it [had] come from. New York has 128 members in
the lower house, and they are apportioned by territory. She has
fifty-nine counties and each county has one representative, then
after that population is the basis, and 37,680 is the ratio for
representatives. When I first came here I lived in Peoria, and
our represe[n]tative had so great an extent of territory to repre-

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 147

sent that he might as well have been in the British Parliament so
far as our interests were concerned, as at Vandalia. He remem-
bered the time when Jo Daviess county furnished representatives
for nine counties, and they generally forget our interests in that
of the interests of Jo Daviess. The whole of those representatives
went in for that bill against the wishes and opinions of the people
of my county, as well as of the adjoining counties.

If the report of this committee be adopted, eighteen counties
will hold the balance of power in the house, and control the whole
State; and the rest of the counties may as well not be represented
at all. These eighteen counties will be entitled to thirty-eight
representatives — a majority of the whole — if population be made
the basis of representation. He hoped every county would have
a representative. — He was not to be frightened because of what
had been said about small counties. He had seen too much, since
yesterday, of gentlemen making calculations of how many repre-
sentatives their counties would have. He was sure every county
would be willing to pay the per diem of its member, rather
than go without one.

Property, also, should be the basis of representation, and the
unanswerable speech of the gentleman from Warren, showed this
fact. If this reduction be adopted, and there should be other
exceptions to the constitution, it will endanger its confirmation by
the people. His county, with 1200 voters, would go against it.
He would like to see the constitution adopted by an overwhelming
majority, but this would endanger it. He meant this not as a
taunt, but as a fact. No man so poor as would be willing that the
bed should be taken from under him, and his wife's and children's
clothing should be sold for taxes, to pay our debt, nor did he
think our creditors would think the better of us if we refused
to have an aristocracy here, and abandon the right of the people to
be represented in the hall of the Legislature. It was one of the
great essentials of a free government. A representative govern-
ment was the terror of tyrants. If gentlemen pass this law, he
would go for a total abandonment of representation, and have the
administration of government in the hands of the executive and
the supreme courts, it would be just as well for the small counties
as to have no representation.

148 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. WILLIAMS was greatly astonished to hear a single
member on that floor declare himself ready to attach the pruning
knife to the salaries of the judges where but a small sum was to be
saved, and not touch the Legislature at all. He was in favor of
sixty members, and was satisfied that they could administer the
government with justice and fidelity to all the interests in the
State. He thought that if the people desired to guard against
bribery, they should select men of integrity, to represent them,
that is the proper guard and not the number. He would vote
against striking out.

Mr. KENNER was not in favor of a large representation, but
thought that every county should have a representative. Every
county had an interest of its own to be represented, and he thought
that if we once denied that interest a representation in the popular
branch of the Legislature, that you might as well abolish the house
altogether. If each county should not be allowed to have a
representative, he would vote for the smallest number that would
be proposed. If one member could represent four counties, why
not represent twenty? We see one branch of the Legislature
representing county rights, the other representing the interests of
the State, at large, thus operating as a check, one upon the other.
Once destroy this principle of a representation of county rights,
and why not throw both houses into one, and thus save the whole
expense. As it is the interest of the State to have a general repre-
sentation, why not let each county have one representative. — We
would then steer clear of aristocracy and anarchy. He had merely
risen to express his views.

Mr. THORNTON represented a large and a small county, and
desired to make some remarks explanatory of the reasons which
should control his vote. If he knew the sentiments of his constitu-
ents upon any subject, he thought he did upon this. They were,
and so was he, in favor of a smaller number to compose the Legis-
lature than that reported by the committee. To hear gentlemen
talk, one would suppose that there was a Chinese wall between
the several counties of the State. There are not those diversified
interests here, as in other States. He would vote against striking
out, for fear of getting a large number; but if the motion to strike

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 149

out prevailed, he would vote for the smallest number. He would
vote for the report for a compromise.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey read a proposition which contained his
own views of the question, yet he would vote for the report of the
committee. He could not agree with the gentlemen who desired
that each county should have a representative. — Such a course
would increase the number beyond that which was necessary.
Speaking of retrenchment, our constituents are looking to us for
no greater move in retrenchment than that which can be affected
in the legislative department. He represented a county which
would, under the plan reported by the committee, lose its repre-
sentative, yet, he was willing to forego the privilege of represen-
tation, for the purpose of lessening the number of the Legislature.
He agreed with much that had fallen from the gentleman from
Jefferson, but he feared that even after adopting all the economy
proposed, we would not realize the promised reduction of the State
debt. He would vote for the report of the committee, fearful
that if the numbers therein should be stricken out, that a larger
one might be adopted, and for fear, also, that if reduced so
suddenly, we might lose the constitution. And then, in addition
to all the evils which we experience now, will be the great cost of
this Convention.

He did not think that the census of 1845 was a proper basis
upon which to district the State; because under it we cannot do
justice to the great increase of population that has taken place
since then. He was in favor of fixing the number low at present
and increase the representation according to the increase of the
population. We should embrace every opportunity that is offered
to save money, and I think there will be no one where we can save
so much as in the present case. Let us reduce the number of
representatives in the Legislature, which, as has been shown, is
the greatest of all extravagances. He agreed with the gentleman
who said he was in favor of allowing a fair and reasonable
compensation to the judges; let us leave those places which are
small in themselves and where there is a fair return of services
for the pay, and turn our attention to the curtailment of the ex-
travagancies of the Legislatures.

Mr. SINGLETON. The committee have reported the very

I50 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

number I advocated when a candidate before the people for a seat
in this Convention. Still I am in favor of a smaller number. He
was greatly surprised to hear gentlemen say that territory should
be the basis of representation. What do we represent — the people
or the naked territory? The population as a ratio was said to be
democratic doctrine, and he, though not a democrat, at least of the
present day, was in favor of it. He could not see the difficulty in
reducing the number of representatives or of putting two or more
counties into one district. He would be perfectly satisfied to
have the gentleman from Pike, or the gentleman from Schuyler,
represent Brown in the Legislature. He did not think Brown
possessed all the capacity. This would break up this local legis-
lation, and it was this local legislation which had involved us in
all our difficulties. If gentlemen were so extremely democratic
as to declare that territory is the only true basis of representation,
why not extend the right of representation not only to counties
but to townships also. Why, at present, if a man is elected from
one side of a county, the people on the other side say they are not
represented. The town of Quincy has an interest different from
that of Mt. Sterling, yet if their representative should be elected
from Quincy he did not know that it must affect Mt. Sterling. If
we give a representative for territory, it is a property qualification,
a land representation, and then why not estimate every species of
property and give it a representation. Territory was no more
than a land or real property qualification, and not more entitled to
a representation than any other species of property. Gentlemen
had said that if we made the districts so large, that none but
lawyers could get elected as representatives. This was but a poor
argument, and one of those long standing means of raising prej-
udices against lawyers or doctors. He thought that clerks of
circuit courts were as fond and as desirous of coming to the Legis-
lature, of holding an office, or two or three of them, if they could
get them, as anybody else. He thought it very undignified in his
colleague to speak in this manner. It required judgment and
discretion to administer the government and not numbers; the only
advantage in having large bodies is that the wants of the people
can be made known; if sixty can do this, then sixty is
enough. If a less number can do it, why then a less number is

SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 1847 151

sufficient. He was not in favor of a large number and then
reducing their pay to the very lowest, but he was in favor of a
small number, and allowing them a fair compensation. If the
State was in good circumstances he would be glad to see them
receive good pay.

Mr. THOMPSON wished to define his position before his
constituents, and to offer a few remarks injustice to the committee,
of which he had the honor to be a member. There were a num-
ber of propositions before the committee, none of them, however,
exceeding one hundred. The number for the Senate was gener-
ally low, three, and sometimes four, to one. He thought at first
that the number as reported by the committee was a little too
large, and would have voted for the motion to strike out, but,
now, fearing that he might hazard the reduction, he would vote
against striking out. Gentlemen had alluded to the State of
Massachusetts, which he did not think was a fair example. The
large number of representatives in the State of Massachusetts was
the result of incorporations. When that state was first settled
the inhabitants were nearly all gathered into small communities
on the coast; these soon were made into incorporations, and after-
wards, when the State became more closely settled, and the people
in the interior increased, they were incorporated and were allowed
a representative. And when the corporations were increased,
they, too, claimed a representative and obtained it. In this way
then, had that State increased her representatives to a great
number.

In this discussion, he had observed the same two great traits of
human nature — pride and interest. It was my county, my town-
ship, and my people. It reminded him of a toast given by a
Connecticut farmer at an agricultural dinner, given in that State.
It was this; "Here's to the United States, the garden of the world;
here's to the State of Connecticut, the garden of the United States;
here's to the County of Wyndam, the garden of the State of
Connecticut; and here's to my farm, the garden of the County of
Wyndham."

There was a burst of patriotism!

Messrs. Logan and Scates continued the debate at much
length; the former advocating the adoption of the report and in

152 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

opposition to the motion to strike out. The latter, in reply to
Mr. L., in support of his views as expressed by him in the morning,
and in advocacy of the motion to strike out. The great length to
which the debate was extended, has compelled us to defer the
publication of the remarks of these gentlemen.

Mr. HOGUE was satisfied that if he understood the senti-
ments of the people whom he represented upon any subject, that
he did on the subject of the number of the Legislature. His con-
stituents were of one opinion and that was that the number should
be reduced below one hundred. He was in favor of striking out,
and would go for the number of eighty — ninety as the excess.
He would oppose all over ninety and vote for any number less.
He was satisfied that the gentleman from Edwards had not
expressed the views of his constituents. We had spoken together
before the people upon this subject, and he had agreed with me
that the number should be reduced.

Mr. KENNER. No, sir, we did not.

Mr. HOGUE reiterated that they had.

Mr. CALDWELL asked that the question should be divided
so as to [be] taken, first on striking out75, and then onstrikingout25.
And the vote being taken separately, both motions were lost.

Mr. DEITZ moved to amend the resolution so as to s[t]rike
out "Legislative committee" and insert "that a committee of one
from each of the senatorial districts shall be appointed, who shall
proceed to divide the State into senatorial and representative
districts."

Mr. SHERMAN moved to amend the amendment by striking
out "one" and inserting "three," and striking out "senatorial"
and inserting "judicial."

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till Monday
next.

XII. MONDAY, JUNE 21, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bergen.

Mr. ROBBINS moved a suspension of the rules to enable him
to offer a resolution, that the Convention should now proceed to
the election of an assistant secretary, to copy the journal for
publication; and the rules were suspended. The vote was then
taken on the adoption of the resolution, and it was lost — yeas 40,
nays not counted.

A motion to re-consider was made and lost — yeas 38.

Mr. MINSHALL offered (the rules being suspended) a resolu-
tion; which was laid on the table.

Mr. SCATES offered a resolution calling for information from
the clerks of the circuit courts of the State.

Mr. DAVIS, of Montgomery, opposed the resolution because
of the impossibility of its being satisfactorily answered, and
because of the great cost which it would be to the State.

Mr. DEMENT moved to lay the resolution on the table.
Carried.

Mr. SHERMAN (the report of the committee on the Legis-
lative Department and the amendment thereto being taken up,)
said, that his object in moving the amendment proposed by him
on Saturday was, that it was more usual to select the committees
from the judicial districts of the State — there being nine judicial
districts, and taking three from each would make the committee
consist of twenty-seven members. This was large enough, and
they ought to be able to arrive at the proper apportionment. He
had not made this proposed amendment from any feeling of
distrust in the committee on Legislative Business, but because he
thought this committee would be better able to perform the duty,
they coming from all parts of the State, and their labor might be
more satisfactory to the people. He was of opinion that no
standing committee, unless selected for the purpose, could give
the same satisfaction as one chosen from the several sections of
the State. It was well known that the districting the State would
153

154 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS ■

create much feeling any way, and he thought the mode which
would be the least objectionable would be the better.

Mr. WHITNEY was in hopes that the amendment would
prevail. By the selection of the committee in this way, territory
would be more likely to be represented. He advocated the
appointment of this select committee, not from any feeling of
distrust in the standing committee, but because he thought a
committee selected from each judicial district could better repre-
sent the views and interests of the several counties than one
selected in any other way.

Mr. DEITZ withdrew his amendment.

Mr. SINGLETON offered an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. KITCHELL explained the reasons why he had moved,
on Saturday, to lay the amendments on the table. It was not
for the purpose of defeating the appointment of a select committee,
but to test the propriety of the Convention undertaking the task
of districting the State, instead of leaving it to the Legislature.

Mr. THOMAS moved to lay the amendment to the amend-
ment on the table; which motion was carried — yeas 76, nays 55.

Mr. HARDING offered an amendment to the amendment,
which, on motion, was laid on the table.

He also offered another amendment to the amendment, pro-
viding that no one county shall be entitled to more than one
representative nor one senator.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to lay this amendment to the
amendment on the table; which was decided in the affirmative —
yeas 69, nays 60.

Mr.HARDING offered another amendment to the amendment.

Mr. EDWARDS, of Madison, moved to lay the whole subject
on the table; a division of the question was demanded, and the
vote being taken on laying the amendment to the amendment on
the table, it was lost — yeas 49; and then the motion to lay the
amendment on the table was decided in the negative.

Mr. HAYES offered the following as a substitute for the
amendment to the amendment, which was accepted:

"Provided, That when more than one county is thrown into
one representative district, the entire number of representatives

MONDAY, JUNE 21, 1847 155

to which those counties may be entitled shall be elected by the
entire district."

Mr. GEDDES advocated, briefly, the adoption of the proviso.

Mr. WEAD considered that the amendment, as it was proposed
by the gentleman from Warren, contained the true and correct
principle in relation to the matter, but that the modification
offered by the gentleman from White, and which had been accept-
ed, did not; but a principle that was calculated to do much injury
to the rights of the larger counties.

Mr. TURNBULL agreed with the gentleman last up, and
opposed the principle of representation or apportionment as pro-
vided by that amendment.

Mr. ARCHER, also, opposed the amendment as one not at
all calculated to do justice to the rights of those counties who had
a fraction of population above the ratio entitling them to a repre-
sentation.— He stated several examples wherein he thought the
injustice of the plan was fully demonstrated.

Mr. McCALLEN was a representative of a small county, and,
under the present system, was not represented in the Legislature.
At present the county of Gallatin was entitled to two representa-
tives, and Gallatin and Hardin one. The people of Gallatin had
the right to vote for three representatives and the people of Hardin
but for a half a representative. Under the proposed plan of the
amendment, the people of Hardin would have nothing more than
what was just, the right of having a vote of equal weight with
that of the people of Gallatin.

Mr. CHURCHILL was not in favor of the apportionments by
the committee. He had drawn up his views, and were it not now
out of order would offer them as an amendment. He would read
to the Convention his plan, as a part of his remarks: Provided
that the Senate districts shall be composed of entire counties,
and that the county commissioners of each county composing the
several Senate districts be authorized, either by themselves or one
of their number, to meet at some proper place in the district and
organize the Senate districts into separate representative districts
according to population, as near as may be.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery was in favor of the plan suggested
by the amendment proposed by the gentleman from White. He

IS6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

thought it not only just to the large counties, but the best mode
of apportionment for those small counties that had not
sufficient population to entitle them to a member.

Messrs. Brockman and Woodson, both, advocated the amend-
ment to the amendment, as the best thing for the interests of the
smaller counties.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess opposed the amendment as
containing a plan to elect the General Assembly by general ticket,
and as unjust to the larger counties, by permitting the small
ones to vote for the whole ticket, and thereby controlling, per-
haps, the election of the representatives of that county to which
they might be attached. Thus giving the voters of a county
which had not sufficient population to entitle them to one mem-
ber a voice in the election of three or four.

Messrs. Hurlbut and Dement, both, opposed the amendment.

Mr. HARVEY agreed with the gentleman from Jo Daviess in
his view of the matter. He looked upon it as nothing more than
a plan to elect the General Assembly by general ticket. The
county of Knox had a population of ten thousand and would be
entitled to a member, then by adding to it the county of Warren
and the fraction of some other county, they, together, would be
entitled to another; this was not anything more than just. But
by adding those two to the county of Knox they would be entitled
to two members, which under the plan proposed would have to be
elected by a general vote of the three counties. By this Knox
county might be controlled in the choice of her representatives,
and that for the gratification of Warren. He had no particular
desire that his county should be married forever to Warren, and
hoped that some way would be discovered that he might procure
a divorce. He moved the indefinite postponement of all the
amendments, because he thought the discussion at present
premature.

Mr. LOGAN did not agree with the plan proposed by the
gentleman in all its details. He had drawn up an amendment
which he would like to see carried out. He read it to the Con-
vention. It proposes that when one or more small counties shall
be added to a large one having a surplus over and above the ratio,
that the large county shall vote for its own representative and for

MONDAY, JUNE 21, 1847 157

the one to which the joint fractions are entitled. But before the
judges shall proceed to give a certificate they shall count all the
votes and after calculating the proportion the whole vote of the
county bears to the fraction over and above the ratio, in the same
proportion shall the vote cast by the large county for the repre-
sentative for the smaller ones and itself, bear in the general vote
between the candidates. Mr. L. explained the proposition and
urged that the only thing required was to have sheriffs and judges
of elections competent to work a sum in the rule of three.

Mr. HAYES defended the plan of apportionment submitted
by him and pointed out the difficulties attending the practical
operation of the plan of the member from Sangamon.

The Convention than adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. DEMENT opposed the plan of the gentleman from White
in a few remarks.

Mr. GREGG was opposed to the Legislature undertaking the
task of districting the State at all; but if it was to be done he was
in favor of the amendment.

Messrs. Kinney of Bureau and Knapp of Jersey opposed the
amendment.

Mr. WILLIAMS replied briefly to Mr. K. of Jersey, and
declared himself in favor of the amendment.

Mr. CHURCHILL still further opposed any mode of appor-
tionment of the State by the Convention anc^ read a series of
propositions that he had prepared on the subject and which he
had submitted to some friends for their approval.

Mr. DEITZ advocated the adoption of single districts.

Mr. SHUMWAY expressed his opposition to the plan of
apportionment before them, and was followed by Mr. Farwell
on the same side.

Mr. LOGAN was in favor of an apportionment by the Conven-
tion, but he thought that before we discussed the mode, we had
better take a vote to ascertain whether the Convention would
undertake to apportion the State or not. With that view he
moved to lay all the amendments and that portion of the resolution
which provides for the districting the State, on the table.

158 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. HARDING withdrew his modified amendment for the
present; and the vote being taken on laying the amendment (Mr.
Sherman's) on the table, it was lost.

Mr. HARDING then renewed his amendment and it was
adopted, and then the amendment as amended was adopted, and
the resolution passed.

Mr. SERVANT presented a petition from a large number of
citizens of Randolph county praying an extension of all rights to
every class without distinction of color, and moved its reference
to the committee on elections and right of suffrage. Carried.

A communication from the Auditor, in reply to a call for infor-
mation was read: it contained an account of the expenses of the
last Legislature.

Mr. THOMAS moved that it lie on the table and 200 copies
thereof be printed

Mr. LOGAN moved that the number be 1,000. Ordered.

Mr. HENDERSON moved that the Secretary of State be
requested to furnish the Convention with a statement of the last
census, and that when furnished 200 copies be printed.

On motion, laid on the table.

On motion, the Convention adjourned.

XIII. TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bailey.^^

The following gentlemen compose the committee to district
the State into senatorial and representative districts:

Gregg, Whiteside, Whitney, Archer, Armstrong, Davis of
Massac, Sim, Hogue, Davis of McLean, Kitchell, Knapp of Jersey,
Palmer of Macoupin, Dummer, Edmonson, West, Farwell, Pratt,
McClure, Shumway, Vance, Harvey, Pinckney, Harlan, Hunsaker,
Jackson, Minshall and Hill.

Mr. ARCHER, from the committee on the Organization of
Departments, and Officers Connected with the Executive Depart-
ment, reported back sundry resolutions which had been referred
to said committee, and asked to be discharged from the further
consideration thereof. Agreed to.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin moved to take up certain reso-
lutions, offered by him some days before, and refer them to the
Judiciary committee, which after they had been modified, were so
referred.

Mr. SCATES moved to take up the resolutions offered by him
yesterday calling for information from the circuit court clerks, &c.

Mr. WHITNEY advocated the adoption of the resolution,
because the committee were of opinion that the information was
needed, and the Convention should pass the call for the same.

Mr. MARSHALL of Mason could see no necessity for the
adoption of the resolution. The information required by it would
impose an immense amount of labor on the clerks of the courts,
which could not be performed for many weeks, so that it was
highly probable that whatever information would be furnished,

^Gilbert S. Bailey: October 1, 1846-October, 1849, pastor of the
First Baptist Church of Springfield; November 7, 1850, assisted in the organ-
ization of the First Baptist Church of Pekin, Tazewell County; 1852-1855,
pastor and school teacher at Pekin.

Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois; History of Sanga-
mon County, 2: 880; Inter-State Publishing Company, ffiitory o/ 5awgofnon
County, 606; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois; History
of Tazewell County, 2: 924-925.

159

i6o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

would not be ready for the use of the Convention for six weeks, a
period when he expected the duties of the Convention would have
been performed. He hoped it would not be taken up, and, on a
division, the motion to take up the resolution was lost.

Mr. HAYES offered a resolution referring certain parts of the
constitution to the committee on Law Reform, and also instructing
that committee to inquire into the expediency of abolishing all
differences between courts of chancery and common law, also the
modification of the laws and the abolition of all English statutes
now in force.

Mr. CHURCH thought this resolution properly belonged to
the consideration of the committee on the Judiciary; he thought
there was a manifest inclination to deprive that committee of its
proper subjects by giving them to the committee on Law Reform.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean thought the committee on Law
Reform was peculiarly the proper committee to take charge of the
inquiry contemplated in the present resolution.
|t&, Mr. HAYES said, that in offering the resolution he did not
think of committing himself in its favor; the subject was one which
had been spoken of by many persons, and by legal men, and he
hoped the reference would be made so that the subject might be
examined. Motion carried.

Mr. KENNER moved to take up a resolution, offered by him
some days ago, with a view of referring it to a committee. Motion
lost.

Mr. WEST offered a resolution that the Convention proceed
to the election of an assistant secretary to copy the journal of the
Convention.

Mr. THOMAS offered a substitute providing that the secretary
shall select an assistant secretary at a compensation of ^3 per day
whose duty it shall be to copy the journal; and that the same be
printed and bound &c., and that the president and secretary, after
the adjournment of the Convention, should attach thereto a
certificate of its authenticity; which substitute was accepted.

Mr. LOGAN offered an amendment, that the Secretary of
State be requested to furnish them with a book or books in which
to keep^the journal, and after the same shall be printed, that he
issue a notice for proposals for binding, &c.

TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1847 161

Mr. BROCKMAN opposed the resolutions. He thought
some weeks ago we had settled this question of the right of this
Convention to limit the pay of the officers of the Convention. He
was no lawyer, but he thought he was able to give a common sense
interpretation of a statute, and the act which called them together
allowed them certain officers and fixed their pay. He considered
that our power in this respect was a delegated one, and we had no
authority to delegate that to another, the act of the Legislature
conferred upon the Convention the power of appointing certain
officers, and he did not believe we had the right to delegate that
power to the secretary or anybody else.

Mr. THOMAS thought that a person who chose to accept the
appointment of an assistant secretary, at the rate fixed by this
resolution, was bound by his contract. He did not admit that
our powers were delegated.

Mr. PRATT agreed with the gentleman from Brown, that the
powers of the Convention in relation to the secretaries and door-
keepers, were delegated to it by the Convention, and that the well
established legal maxim, that delegated powers cannot be dele-
gated, applied to the resolution now before them. He was opposed
to the resolution, though he desired to have the journal printed,
in order that it might be placed daily on their table, and that it
might progress with their progress.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery sincerely hoped that fhey would
have no more legal arguments about delegated powers, &c. One
week of the Convention had already been wasted upon that
subject, and he knew that if they did elect a secretary, or authorize
the appointment of one as this resolution contemplated, it would
be of very little importance; neither their acts, nor the constitution
they might form would, in either case, be void. He was in favor
of the resolution, because it looked to the performance of the work
— the printing of the journal and the binding of it in strong books —
in accordance with all past legislation. The only difference was
the pay at $3 a day, while he understood the Legislature allowed
a copyist last year ^3.50. If gentlemen would move an amend-
ment changing the pay to that amount, he would have no objection
to voting for it. There was, however, no such thing to be expected

i62 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

as having the journal upon the table every day, there was no
precedent for such a course.

Mr. THOMAS made some remarks, when the vote was taken
on the amendment and adopted, and the resolution as amended
was decided in the affirmative — yeas 76, nays 43.

Mr. GREGG moved to take up the report of the committee
on the Executive Department, made some days ago; which motion
was carried. He then, the chairman of the committee being
absent, moved that it be made the special order for Tuesday next.
Carried.

Mr. PRATT said that Mr. Markley had been called home
on particular business — sickness in his family — and had requested
him to beg a leave of absence for him for ten days. Granted.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon submitted a resolution instruct-
ing the committee on the Legislative Department to inquire into
the expediency of incorporating a number of stated provisions on
several matters, into the constitution.

Mr. WITT moved to amend by striking out so much of the
resolution as required the committee to inquire into the modes of
taking the census hereafter. He said that the committee had
agreed upon that matter and upon a very different mode than that
contained in the proposition of the gentleman from Sangamon.
It would be well to have a vote upon the matter now, in order that
the question might be tested, whether the plan proposed by the
committee would meet the views of the Convention, if not, then
the committee would feel themselves instructed and would report
accordingly.

Mr. THOMAS suggested that the resolution was one directing
an inquiry by the committee only, and, even if the committee
had determined upon a plan, could do no harm; moreover
many would vote for the reference who might be opposed to the
propositions contained in the resolutions and that could be no
test vote.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon said that he had hoped the
resolution would have been permitted to go to the committee
without debate. He was opposed to the amendments offered by
the gentleman from Greene. His object in presenting the reso-
lutions was to direct an inquiry as to the best mode of stopping all

TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1847 163

electioneering for offices either under the State or general govern-
ment, by members of the Legislature, or through the friends of
the members, or by reason of their weight or influence, also, that
no member of the Legislature should hold or be eligible to any
office created by the Legislature of which he was a member, or the
salary of which had been increased by that body while he was there.
He had offered them, because he thought that perhaps the com-
mittee might not have had all these subjects under their consider-
ation.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that he had no doubt but
the Convention, when the committee should report, would agree
with them in the main principles set forth. But the present
resolution was merely one of inquiry, and there could be no harm
in adopting it, nor would it interfere in any way with the report
of the committee,' which he understood had been agreed on.

Mr. CHURCH said, he would like to see the form of the oath
contained in one of the resolutions amended.

Mr. EDWARDS explained that it was only an oath to support
the constitution.

Mr. DEMENT said, that the committee had inquired into
the matters contained in the resolutions, and that the subject of
the first of them — the time and mode of taking the census — had
been settled by that committee, and if the Convention had no
objection it was desirable that a vote should be taken upon the
subject at once, and the matter tested. He had no objection to
the inquiry, but the committee had inquired into the subject, and
had come to a conclusion, and why not have a test vote now, and
say whether this resolution contains the views of the Convention.
He asked that the vote might be taken on this resolution separately.
The yeas and nays were demanded.

Mr. LOGAN said, that he could not see how this vote could be
a test. Many were in favor of referring the resolutions who might
be in favor of the report of the committee.

Mr. NORTON said, he was desirous to give his reasons why
he should vote in the affirmative. He was not prepared to vote
for the proposition of the gentleman from Sangamon, but if any
gentleman proposed a mere resolution of inquiry, as he understood

i64 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

this to be, he would always vote for reference, and, if the yeas and
nays were called, he desired that the reasons of his vote might be
expressed.

Mr. CHURCHILL read a proposition bearing on the matter,
which he would like to offer if in order.

The demand for the yeas and nays was withdrawn, and the
resolution passed.

Mr. CHURCHILL moved a suspension of the rules, to enable
him to present a resolution. Lost.

The resolution of instruction to the committee on Incorpora-
tions, and the substitute therefor — offered on Friday last — then
came up in order.

Mr. GREGG offered the following amendments to the amend-
ment, as a substitute therefor:

Resolved, That the committee on Incorporations be instructed
to inquire into the expediency of so limiting the power of the
General Assembly as to prohibit the establishment of corporations,
or associations, with banking privileges, except on the basis of the
following provisions:

1st. The General Assembly shall have no power to pass any
act granting any special charter for banking purposes, but corpo-
rations or associations free to all the inhabitants of this State may
be formed for such purposes under general laws.

2d. The General Assembly shall have no power to pass any
law sanctioning in any manner, directly or indirectly, the suspen-
sion of specie payments by any person, association, or corporation,
issuing bank notes of any description.

3d. The General Assembly shall provide by law for the
registry of all bills, or notes, issued, or put in circulation as money;
and shall require ample security, by the pledge of public stocks,
or otherwise, for the redemption of the same in specie.

4th. The stockholders in every corporation and joint stock
association, for banking purposes, issuing bank notes, or any
kind of paper credits to circulate as money, shall be individually
responsible for all its debts and liabities; and to make provision
for the payment of such debts and liabilities they shall be required

TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1847 165

to furnish unexceptionable security of twice the amount of their
respective share in any such corporation or association.

5th. In case of the insolvency of any banking association, the
bill holders thereof shall be entitled to preference of payment over
all other creditors of such association.

6th. The embezzlement of the funds or property of any corpo-
ration, or joint association, for banking purposes by any officer or
agent thereof, shall be deemed felony, and it shall be the duty of
the General Assembly to provide for the punishment of such
felony, by imprisonment in the penitentiary.

7th. No act of the General Assembly authorizing corporations
or associations with banking powers shall go into effect, or in
any manner be in force, unless the same shall be directly submitted
to the people at the general election next succeeding the passage
thereof, and shall be approved by a majority of all the votes cast
at such election.

8th. Any general law of this State authorizing the creation
of corporations, or associations, with banking powers may be
repealed by the General Assembly.

Mr. GREGG said, that he desired to express, briefly, a few of
the considerations which had induced him to present the propo-
sition. He was opposed to banks in any shape or form. He
would be in favor of an entire prohibition of them. He was one
of those who believed banks, in any shape, manner or form, to be
an unmitigated evil, and that their consequences were always
disastrous and destructive to the people. He was not prepared
then to go into a discussion of the question of banks and banking,
but when the matter should come before them, from the hands of
the committee, then he would enter into the subject more fully.
It had been indicated by votes that had been taken — a manifest
intention has been shown by the Convention, that there should
be banks of some description. A majority of the Convention had
made this manifest declaration. The question then presented to
us was, "shall we leave the power to create these banks, or to adopt
a system of banking, with the Legislature or with the people?"

Should we leave the Legislature with a power so great, which
will, if put into force, affect the wealth and prosperity of the
whole State.

1 66 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

He was opposed to this. He was unwilling to leave the power
to adopt this dangerous and destructive system with any body
but the people themselves. If there was a determination on the
part of the Convention to adopt some system of banking, let us
present it to the people in the most modified form, and permit the
evil in the least objectionable shape, and it will go to the people
who will vote understandingly upon the subject. He thought his
proposition presented the odious evil in the least objectionable
form; people could vote upon the proposition itself, instead of
voting for men to frame the system. He believed banks to be
great evils in any shape and any form. If the Legislature was
to be trusted with the power to credit those institutions, let us
place restrictions upon them, so that they may clearly see their
powers and limits; but if the people are to be afflicted with any
system of evil, he thought they should have every opportunity of
voting understandingly upon the subject and of saying in what
way it should be done. He was not prepared now to enter further
into the discussion of the question, but would at some future time,
go into a full exposition of his views and of the proposition sub-
mitted. He did not think the convention was prepared to discuss
the matter now, and he was in favor of referring all the propositions
to the committee on Incorporations.

Mr. CHURCHILL was in favor of referring the whole subject
to the committee of the whole.

Mr. THOMAS would prefer that we should have the report
of the committee on Incorporations on the subject, and then go
into the committee of the whole, and discuss the propositions to-
gether. He would suggest that when such things as a system of
banking were to be referred to the people for their approval or
condemnation, you denied the people the right of selecting a
system they might be in favor of, and if allowed a choice, would
select a system very different from that which you presented to
them, as contemplated by the substitute offered today; the sub-
mitting to the people whether they would adopt a particular plan,
was not extending to them much of a privilege.

Mr. GREGG said, that when the committee should make a
report, the whole subject would again be discussed, and he saw

TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1847 167

no use in such a course as debating the subject now, and when the
report was made, to discuss it all-over again.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery thought the question might be
discussed now as well as at any other time, and he was in favorof
proceeding at once. He was in favor of an unqualified prohibition
to be inserted in the constitution. He was not willing to declare
or admit that the majority of this convention was in favor of
banks. Nor was he one of those who acting thus would propose
a system of banking. He did not believe in gentlemen asserting
that they were opposed to banks in any shape, and then proposing
a system of banking! Let those who say that banks are evils,
come out boldly and meet the question, and first say that there
shall be no banks. He would vote to make it the special order
for 2 o'clock this day. He was afraid they would get less in
number by delaying the question; the prohibition party was
already in a small minority. He was certain they would get less
by postponing the debate, particularly when we see those who say
that they are opposed to all banks proposing schemes of banking
without showing any sort of fight. There were some ready to
come up to the rack anyhow, and he hoped the debate would go
on now.

Mr. LOGAN said, he rose to defend the gentleman from Cook
(Mr. Gregg) from the attack of the gentleman from Montgomery
(Mr. Davis.) — There was little or no difference between the plan
proposed by the gentleman from Cook and an entire prohibition,
for he was sure that if there was to be no bank in the State except
according to the plan proposed, no application would ever be
made for a charter. He was in favor of taking up some one of
the questions now, and, before the committee blocks out the
system, or the article go[es] into the constitution, we could give them
some intimation of the opinion of the Convention on the subject. —
If the Convention should come to the conclusion to have no banks,
why, they could so inform the committee; if they determine to
have banks, they could agree in some way upon the restrictions;
and again, if the power to charter banks is to be given to the Legis-
lature, say whether it shall be given with or without restrictions; if
with restrictions, define them. He thought this question of banks
the most important — the main question — to be decided by the

i68 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Convention; that is, the most important controverted subject
they would be called to act upon. He moved to refer it to the com-
mittee of the whole, and made the special order of the day for Fri-
day next.

Mr. HAYES hoped the resolutions and amendments would all
be referred to the committee upon Incorporations instead of the
committee of the whole, when gentlemen were not prepared to
discuss the matter at so short a notice. The gentleman who had
proposed the substitute was in favor of referring it to the commit-
tee on Incorporations, and he thought the Convention should do
so. He differed from the gentleman from Bond, in supposing that
the number of those whom they voted with on this subject, would
grow less by delay: on the contrary, he thought it would be better
for them to fight some definite plan, and to have some scheme to
rally against.

Mr. GEDDES was rather astonished to hear his friend from
Montgomery charge upon the gentleman from Cook. There ap-
peared to him but little difference between them; they both looked
upon banks as a hydra-headed monster; the gentleman from Mont-
gomery proposed to kill him right out; the gentleman from Cook
proposed to chain him, and the gentleman from JeflPerson
offered to knock him in the head after he was chained. It was
all one thing. He would vote for referring the matter to the
committee on Incorporations.

Mr. HENDERSON said, he would prefer that the committee
should first make a report, so that the Convention might have
something tangible before them to discuss. He moved a refer-
ence to the committee on Incorporations.

Mr. DAVIS, of Montgomery, was still in favor of giving the
whole subject to the committee of the whole, because he thought
that those who were opposed to banking would have the best
way of meeting all the propositions for and against banks and
banking. He saw that the great objection to going into a dis-
cussion now comes not from those who are opposed to banking,
but from those tender-footed gentlemen who are more than half
in favor of banks and yet are opposed to them.

Mr. PALMER, of Macoupin, differed from the gentleman
last up in this particular, though not on others. That gentleman

TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1847 169

was orthodox upon the real subject. He was not in favor of pro-
ceeding now with the discussion. He thought the friends of
the banks ought to come forward with their proposition, and then
we could oppose it. We were altogether on the defensive, and
he much preferred a regular field fight to this system of guerrilla
warfare. This question of banks was the most important one
that would come before the Convention, as it would affect the
future interests and prosperity of the State, and it depended on
our resistance to defeat the evils. If they were to be beaten, and
the State was to have banks, he would prefer that the friends of
these institutions should prepare that system which their wisdom
and experience would allow. If the rights of the people were to
be invaded let it be done by the friends of the system.

Mr. THOMAS said, that it was much better that the committee
should first report before we commenced the discussion, and
when the committee had reported one plan, these propositions of
the gentlemen, or any others, might be offered as amendments,
and in this way the whole subject would be regularly before them.
He would say to the gentleman from Macoupin that upon this
question he might find himself in a position not altogether on the
defensive. We may adopt banks or a system of banks, and then
when the gentleman comes to put restrictions upon them, he will
find himself attacking the right of the people to have such an
institution as they thought proper. If this matter was to be dis-
cussed, he desired to have the whole subject before them and
gentlemen would be obliged to show their hands.

Mr. PALMER, of Macoupin, said, so far as he understood the
sentiments of the people of Illinois, he considered that those who
spoke of having banks should always speak of restrictions upon
them. — He was certain that no one dare send to the people a
system of banking without attaching to it many restrictions. He
stood there on the side of the people, behind a prohibitory clause,
and while his party presented a perfectly invulnerable barrier to
protect the people from any such system as banks or banking, the
other party were compelled to come forward with a restrictive
policy; something put around the plan to sweeten the dose, and
showed that they were unwilling to turn the monster unrestricted

I70 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

upon the people. He thought that the proper mode of discussing
the question was to have some definite plan or proposition before
them, for if we turned the Convention out upon the sea of banks
and banking systems, they would be weeks at it before they came
to any conclusion upon the subject.

Mr. HURLBUT was in favor of referring the whole subject
to the committee of the whole, as he thought it would shorten the
discussion and have a principle decided at once.

And the question being taken on referring the propositions on
the subject to the committee of the whole, it was decided in the
affirmative — yeas 71, nays 50.

Mr. KNOX offered a series of resolutions in reference to the
qualification, &c. of free white male inhabitants of the State to
vote; which he moved to refer to the committee on Elections and
Right of Suffrage.

Mr. WHITNEY moved to strike out the word "white"
wherever it occurred in the resolutions; and the vote being taken
by yeas and nays, was decided in the negative — yeas 7, nays 137.
The resolution was then referred.

Mr. DAWSON offered a resolution directing an inquiry, by
the committee on Finance, in relation to the school fund.

Mr. HOGUE offered a substitute; which was accepted.

Mr. LOGAN offered an amendment; which was accepted.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till to-mor-
row at 9 A. M.

XIV. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Barger.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean presented a petition of a number of
citizens of McLean county, praying tiie Convention to adopt some
constitutional provision, for the appointment of a superintendent
of public instruction with a liberal salary; which was read and
referred to the committee on Education.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison, from the committee on Educa-
tion, reported the following resolutions:

Resolved, That the committee on Education be instructed to
consider and report as to the propriety of a constitutional provi-
sion for the security of the college, seminary and common school
funds from conversion or destruction by the Legislature; also, for
the establishment of such a system of common schools as will, by
taxation, combined with the State funds, afford the means of
education to every child in the State, and for the appointment of a
State Superintendant [sic], with an adequate salary to give eiFect
to such a system.

In presenting the reported resolutions from the committee
Mr. E. said, that the first object contemplated by the resolutions
was to secure the fund belonging to the college, seminary and
common schools from all misappropriations from its true and
sacred object.

The second was to establish some sure and permanent system
of appropriation and distribution of the fund, combined with a
fair and reasonable taxation and the State funds, give such credit
and security that every child in the State of Illinois may have the
invaluable and incalculable advantages of education. The third
branch of the resolution had reference to the appointment of a
State Superintendant of education. There could be no
question of the necessity of providing for the security of the
college, school and seminary fund — which necessity arose from
the large amount of the fund — from being squandered by the
Legislature for purposes diflPerent from the object of the fund.
171

172 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The amount of the fund was f 800,000 and was fast accumulat-
ing from the 3 per cent, fund provided by the general government.
It was true that one-sixth of this 3 percent, fund was appropriated
by the general government for the purpose of building a university,
but fortunately for the State no time had been prescribed by law
for the completion or commencement of this work, and the Legis-
lature has wisely appropriated the whole of it to the school fund.
The greatest care should be kept of this fund, and its purposes
and objects should be guarded and protected from any control or
disposition of [it] by the Legislature. It should be esteemed by all
as a sacred trust in the hands of the State, whose duty and interest
it was to see properly administered.

He would cite one instance of this kind — the Transylvania
Institution, which was at one time one of the most promising and
flourishing institutions of the character in the country, but which,
by improvident legislation, owing to the curious state of politics
of the time, had been reduced and dwindled down to an institution
but little above a common school. It was an essential element in
the establishment of common schools with a large fund, that it
should be so provided that the fund should be permanently and
safely invested and the interest distributed all over the State, and
thus secure the benefits of education to the youth of every town
and village in Illinois. He would appeal to the experience of the
president and other members of the Convention to the danger of
improvident legislation, of the attempts to distribute the fund to
the several counties, and thereby to lose the whole; while the best
and only safe plan was to have the fund all remain permanently
invested and the interest only to be distributed. He was not
prepared to say that the Convention can make any such provision
as to secure permanency of this fund. The great difficulty with
the people was the many changes, and the uncertainty of the
present system; the spirit of innovation was forever at work and
the people are always in the dark; the changes were so often and
repeated that they could not know how the matter stands. He
hoped that something would be done. The last part of the reso-
lution looks to the appointment of a State Superintendant
of instruction, and in support of that appointment he would refer
to the example and experience of other States; and he had no fear

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 173

of contradiction when he said that in no State had they succeeded
with their school funds, without establishing such an office. New
York, Massachusetts and Ohio, all have an officer of this kind,
and through his influence, labors and experience every township
and village in the State had a school. He would like to present
to the members of the Convention the report of the superintend-
ant of public instruction of Ohio, and when the Convention
would see the labor of that officer and its results, upon the system
of education and the fund, he would think the matter settled.

Let them look at the complicated machinery of the administra-
tion of this office, its various sources of information and the facil-
ities with which all errors could be corrected, and no man could
deny the utility of the office. But he was met with the expense
of such an office. Sir, said he, we are met here in the capacity of
a convention to reform our system in all its branches; we may
save an immense amount of money by applying the pruning knife
of retrenchment to the several departments of our government,
and in so doing he was willing to go as far as any man in the
principle of economy, but not in a niggardly picayune system.

Let us apply a portion of this amount saved to the payment of
this officer and the people will not complain. We may then go,
after saving this amount from other branches of the government,
before the people and show them that we have economized all the
expenses of the State, and saved them annually much more than
the salary of this officer, and in view of the immense benefits they
will derive from the administration of the school fund by him, no
county will receive his appointment without approbation.

The labors of the office of Secretary of State are too much and
too arduous to enable him to do justice to the exofficio office of
superintendant of public instruction.

Mr. E. here read an extract from the report of the Ex-Secretary
of State, now a member on this floor. Mr. E. pursued the subject
for some time pointing out the many advantages flowing from a
general diffusion of knowledge and a complete system of education
among the people, he painted the beneficial results of such insti-
tutions in the most vivid and glowing terms, and hoped that some
encouragement would be given by a constitutional provision, to
young men who were poor and now in obscurity. In conclusion

174 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

he said that since he had been here he had listened with pleasure
and profit to the maiden efforts of several young men, who had
themselves derived benefits from education, and he appealed to
them to lend their aid in laying the foundations of a good, sound
and perfect system of common schools, which would afford other
youths an opportunity to become a benefit and ornament to their
country. To the older ones he deemed such an appeal unnecessary.

The PRESIDENT said that he had suffered the debate to
proceed, being unaware that there was a resol[u]tion pending at
the adjournment of the Convention yesterday.

The following resolution, as modified, then came up before
the Convention:

Resolved, That the committee on Education be instructed to
inquire into the expediency of adopting a constitutional provision
for increasing the common school fund, and to prevent the Legis-
lature from borrowing any portion of the school, college or seminary
fund in [the] future.

Mr. LOGAN offered to amend by adding thereto, "to defray
the ordinary expenses of the government," also the following:

"And that the same committee be instructed, also, to inquire
into the expediency of providing by the constitution that the
moneys hereafter received from the school, college and seminary
funds shall be invested in the bonds of this State at their market
value; and, also, that the interest on bonds so purchased shall be
punctually paid, to defray the ordinary expenses of the State debt."

Mr. DEITZ moved to add, after the first amendment of Mr. L.,
the following:

"And that hereafter the first moneys that shall come into the
treasury in each and every year shall be set apart for payment to
the proper authorities, or persons entitled by law to their respec-
tive proportion of the interest annually accruing upon the school,
college and seminary fund."

Mr. LOGAN advocated his plan of adding to the school fund.
He illustrated the operation of it thus: His proposition was, that
the State should authorize the commissioner of the school fund to
go into the market and invest it in bonds of the State of Illinois.
Thus with the school fund you could buy, with one hundred thous-
and dollars, two hundred thousand dollars worth of the bonds —

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 175

putting the market value of the bonds at 50 cents. — The State,
then, would pay the interest on two hundred thousand dollars
into the school fund, the school fund would be doubled, the
bonds would be out of the hands of foreign creditors, and no one
would be injured. Mr. L. expatiated at length on this plan of
increasing and benefitting the school fund.

Mr. DAVIS, of Montgomery, opposed the plan as reflecting
on the honor and integrity of the State. He thought that it was
not honorable or just for the State, after having, by unwise, if not
worse, legislation become in debt, and then depreciated her own
bonds, to go into the market and buy them up at half their value,
and appropriate the profits of the shaving to pay its debts to
another fund.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, he was in favor of the resolution of
the gentleman from Sangamon for three reasons, and would be
glad to see the whole of the school fund invested by the school
commissioner in the State bonds. His reasons were, that the
school fund would be doubled or greatly increased; that the debt
would become a domestic instead of a foreign one; and that the
people would gladly and willingly pay the taxes to meet the interest
upon the bonds, when they knew they were contributing to a
fund so beneficial to themselves and children.

Mr. WEST made a few remarks in opposition, which led to an
explanation by Mr. C. and Mr. Logan.

Mr. THOMAS was not only in favor of the plan proposed by
the gentleman from Sangamon, but he would go further and
require that the fund belonging to every township in the State
should be invested in State bonds, and then the people would
more readily pay their taxes, being conscious that every cent they
paid would be going for the advancement of their own interest
and the benefit and education of their children. It would
also lead to the permanency and perpetuity of the institutions
of the State, to have her debt all owing to the various townships
and funds and citizens of her own State. He cited the cases of
France and Great Britain, whose debt was held by her own citizens,
and to this he ascribed the safety of England from a revolution.

Mr. TURNBULL opposed, briefly, the adoption of any system

176 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

compelling the townships to invest their money in State stock or
in any way other than at present, or than the people desired.

Mr. BROCKMAN said, that he approved of the plan if he
understood it properly. If this money was invested in the school
fund and the interest paid out to the townships in gold or silver, or
in par funds, he was with them; but if the interest was to be paid
out as it is now, in Auditor's warrants of depreciated value, he
would oppose the whole system.

Mr. ARMSTRONG was opposed to any such disposition of
the township funds as had been shadowed forth by the gentleman
from Morgan, because it was now invested in good mortgaged
property, and the interest was paid in gold and silver. He was
opposed to the system of furnishing the counties with their
respective shares of the school fund in Auditor's warrants, when
the people paid their taxes in gold and silver.

Mr. CHURCHILL said, that for the past two years, at least,
the Auditor sends the money to the school commissioner, and if
they receive nothing but Auditor's warrants it was the fault of
the officer. He was opposed to any distribution of the fund in
any shape, manner or form.

Mr. KENNER made a few remarks in relation to the difficulty
in obtaining teachers for the schools, when they were to receive
nothing but Auditor's warrants for their pay.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean was in favor of the plan of the gentle-
man from Sangamon, and also that spoken of by the gentleman
from Morgan. He could see no possible objection to the former,
as it was the most feasible plan of increasing the school fund with
advantage and without doing the least injury to anyone. It
might be called a crying shame were the State to send a man into
the market to buy up her own bonds at a depreciated value, and thus
avoid the payment of half her debt; but not so if the commissioner
of the school fund make the purchase of the bonds at the market
value, as the State would still have to pay the whole amount of
her bonds with interest. He would show how much the school
fund would be increased, by supposing a case. Say the commis-
sioner with ^100,000 of the school fund bought up, at the market
value, bonds of the State amounting to $200,000. In the first
place, the amount of the school fund would be doubled, and when

fVEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 177

the interest on the $100,000 would be |6,ooo that on the $200,000
would be 1 1 2,000, thereby increasing to double the amount the
sum to be distributed for the purposes of education. And who
was to lose? No one. And the children all over the State would
be greatly benefitted by this increase of the means of education.
Mr. D. then pointed out the vast benefits which, in his opinion,
would follow from the investment of the township funds in this
stock, in comparison to the present system of loaning it out to
private individuals.

Mr. SHERMAN opposed everything like a provision directing
the investment of the township fund in stocks of the State. In
his county they had an excellent fund, upon which they received
12 per cent, interest; they paid their teachers in cash, and he did
not want the Convention to come there and make them invest it
in State bonds bearing 6 per cent, only — and that, too, in Aud-
itor's warrants.

[Mr. DEMENT said, admitting, for the sake of argument, that
there is nothing immoral or improper in the State using her school
fund to pay up her own bonds at their present depreciated market
value, the resolution seemed to him to be placing the character of
the State in a most unenviable position. The whole project, when
taken together, contemplates, under the agency and action of the
State, by solemn constitutional provision, not only to provide for
purchasing the bonds, at a brokerage rate, from the creditors, but
it carries with it a determination to make a palpable distinction
in the payment of interest in favor of the bonds held by the State.
Mr. D. said, I say State, for I cannot separate the State from the
people — or make a distinction between one fund, owned by
the people of the State, and another. Any act which may be per-
formed by the State, for the benefit of the people of the State, and
their children, and particularly in the most imposing of all forms —
by a convention of the representatives of the people of the State,
assembled to remodel their organic law, will never be viewed in
any other light by the civilized world than the act of the State —
the people of the State.

It will be useless for us to say that it is intended for a separate
department of the State government — that is for a special purpose.

178 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

In the minds of the disinterested we cannot make a distinction,
particularly when the proposition is coupled with the provision
that the interest on the bonds, bought by the State, shall be punc-
tually paid out of the first money in the treasury, while at the same
time we cannot pay more than one per cent, on bonds of a similar
character held by our creditors, who have the public faith solemn-
ly pledged for their redemption.

When our creditors contemplate the character and full force
of this project, it does appear to me that quite a different impres-
sion will be created upon the minds of our bondholders than some
gentlemen anticipate. I think it more likely that they will see
in the scheme a disposition to speculate and shave our own obli-
gations, and that having the power to "prefer our creditors," we
unblushingly prefer ourselves as a creditor of ourselves. After
we have taken this step, so partial to ourselves — so yielding to a
feeling of unjustifiable cupidity, it will be useless for us to allege
that it was done for a laudable purpose — for the enhancement of
a sacred fund.

I am aware, said Mr. D., that it is a forcible appeal to the
popular impulses — an appeal in favor of the education of the
youth of our State, but the objections I urge are an impassable
barrier between myself and the project. I would gladly support
any feasible plan for the augmentation of the school fund, but it
must be an honorable one. We all, doubtless, have the same
object in view, but differ as to the means of attaining that object.

There is another objection which I have, which is, to the prac-
tical effect which this mode of increasing the school fund must
and will have upon the people in the way of a tax; not direct, but
which seems to me not altogether indirect. For illustration:
say we now raise a direct tax of $50,000 per annum, and pay it
out as interest on the school fund. Now suppose, to make the
illustration clear, that we were in a situation to invest all the
school fund in States bonds, at fifty cents to a dollar, with a view
to double the principal nominally, and to double the interest sub-
stantially, and in fact, and at the same time contemplate the
prompt payment of the whole amount of school fund now doubled
by this honest(?) speculation, as gentlemen please to consider it,
will we not have to provide for the payment of the additional

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 179

^50,000 of interest per annum, by a direct tax upon the people?
which must be in addition to the present heavy rate of taxation,
or by absorbing that much of our present means of paying the
interest we are now paying on our bonds. I think this will be
well understood by our bondholders as, to some extent, practi-
cally repudiating the interest, at least, on our debt; and the
people will, understand, distinctly feel the additional tax. But
gentlemen say this is only to effect the subject so far as the school
fund shall hereafter be received, but, sir, if the principle is not
right in the whole extent, it cannot be because the transaction is
small or limited.

I object, also, said Mr. D., to sending an agent into the market
with this sacred fund, intended to store the minds of our youth
with knowledge, and an appreciation of correct morals and princi-
ples, subjecting it to the losses and misfortunes heretofore ex-
perienced in our monetary transactions. I doubt the propriety
of risking this money in this wild speculation, when I am im-
pressed that it is more than suspected that there are large amounts
of spurious bonds in circulation so like the genuine that the men
who made them can hardly distinguish the true from the false.]^

Mr. LOGAN asked if the gentleman from Montgomery,. who
opposed this amendment, was prepared to say that the debt to
the school fund should fare the same fate as the other debts of the
State and that no provision should be made towards its payment.
We were not able to pay our debt, but should we neglect to advance
or increase our school fund, until we were able to pay that debt.
We had a right to prefer debts. It was a well established legal
principle that a man can prefer a debt in one creditor's hands to
that of another. If this plan be adopted and we purchased these
bonds the people will have no hesitation to pay the whole interest
when they know it is to be applied to the advancement of educa-
tion, and the means of improving the morals and integrity of the
people. The present question before them was a single one; the
propriety of appropriating the school fund to the purchase of these
State bonds. It had nothing to do with the township money.

-'The full report of Demerit's remarks printed in the weekly Illinois
Stale Register of July 2, is here substituted for a brief general summary.

i8o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

That was another question and he did not want his proposition to
be prejudiced by having other subjects connected with the dis-
cussion of it. He had lived in this county fifteen years, and he
was certain that the question whether the township funds turned
out profitable or otherwise depended on the sort of men you choose
for your commissioners. During the whole of the time he had
lived here, they had had prudent commissioners, except for two
years, then the commissioner squandered a large slice of the fund.
He might also instance a case of the same kind that occurred in
Macoupin.

Mr. GEDDES was in favor of the plan of the gentleman from
Sangamon, because it made the fund permanent and safe and
increased it. He was also in favor of the suggestion of the gentle-
man from Morgan.

Mr. KNOWLTON expressed himself at some length in favor
of the amendment and in reply to the gentleman from Lee. He
could see no dishonesty in the plan and would view it merely as a
business transaction. Those who held the bonds might or might
not sell their bonds at 50 cents, no one could compel them to take
less than the full amount, and they might retain them till the
State was able to pay the whole sum. He was opposed to the
proposition that the township fund should be used up in the pur-
chase of the State bonds.

Mr. KNOX said, that the only question with him was did
the plan if carried out affect the honor or integrity of the State.
He did not think that anyone there believed the State could with
its present resources, ever be able to pay the interest on the State
debt. And how was it to be paid? When, by the increase of
population the wealth and means of the State were enlarged. And
in his opinion the proceedings of this Convention had much to do
with it. Suppose we go to our creditors and tell them our circum-
stances and ask them shall we make a provision in our constitution
for the education and moral improvement of our children, he was
sure they would reply, yes, do so, and let it be a liberal one.
There is a provision in our law, made by the Legislature to build
school houses, and the property of non-residents was taxed to pay
it, and he had heard some of them say they were glad that such a
tax had been levied, because it would increase the value of their

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 181

lands. He would vote for the resolution of the gentleman from
Sangamon.

Mr. MASON thought that so far from the present question
involving a principle of dishonesty, on which ground objections
had been made, that it presented itself most favorably in a moral
point of view. There were many who held our stock, which was now
very low, and who could not afford to live on fancy stocks or upon
promises to pay, which never were redeemed, and, if in case this
passed our stock would rise in the market as he was sure it would,
these persons might dispose of it to some advantage.

Mr. THOMAS moved the previous question. Ayes 65 — Noes
66; not seconded.

A motion to adjourn till to-morrow was lost. Ayes 48.

On motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 o'clock, p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr.DEITZ briefly explained the nature of his amendment.

Mr. ROUNTREE said, he was not in favor of binding the
Legislature to invest this fund in the State bonds, but he would
like to see it so amended as to read — "in stocks most safe and
productive," and the interest only to be distributed. He thought
it very probable that in twenty years the proposition of the gentle-
man from Sangamon might appear a little exceptionable.

Mr. WILLIAMS thought it sufficient only to understand the
proposition to be in favor of it.

Mr. LOGAN apologized for speaking again upon this question,
inasmuch as he felt a great interest in it; it was one of his hobbys
[sic]. After some remarks upon the practice of the Legislature
in drawing the gold and silver belonging to this fund for the purpose
of paying their per diem, he said he thought we were on the eve of
some great speculation. And he appealed to the Convention not
to leave with the Governor and Legislature, the power of investing
this fund in any scheme they thought proper. Very soon some
person or another would have a railroad or a plank road company,
and it could be calculated up that by investing this fund in the
stock that it would yield some 18 per cent. The Governor would,
if permitted to act according to the suggestion of the Legislature
be sure to invest it in some moonshine stock which, like when the

i82 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

system of internal improvements was before them, would be shown
by figures "which could not lie," would yield immense profits.
The fund would be safe in the State stock, but if you left the power
to the Legislature, to invest it as they thought proper, they would
run mad as they had run mad before.

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, inquired what was to be done for the
interest on those bonds not bought up by this fund? And being
answered that it was to remain as at present, he opposed the dis-
crimination as unjust to the other holders of the bonds.

Mr. BROCKMAN said, he thought when he told the gentlemen
in the morning that he was with them, that the bonds were to be
purchased at par, and not at the market price. Understanding
now that this was contemplated he would vote against it. States,
in his opinion, were like individuals, and what was dishonest in an
individual was dishonest in a State. Things cast their shadows
before them. It was said we were on the eve of a speculation,
and the first thing going that way was a proposition to swindle
the creditors of the State. It had also been said that the consti-
tution would not live long enough to see the State debt paid; he
was afraid it would not live at all, although it was yet in embryo, so
many odious plans and provisions were to be engrafted upon it,
he did not think it would be adopted. He supposed another part
of the speculation would be in relation to a bank, but when that
come[s] before the Convention we will attend to them.

Mr. PALMER, of Marshall, said, that he had listened to all
that had been said upon the question, and his mind had come to
the same conclusion before the discussion that it had now. He
had looked at the foundation of the two debts of the State of
Illinois; the first was contracted by the State with individuals who
lent us the money, they at the same time acting as their own
agents, and he had always thought that both parties were in fault
in relation to the matter. Though not in the Legislature, he read
the newspapers and journals of the day — indeed, they were his
reading except when engaged with the bible and other religious
works. He thought the State unwise in the undertaking, and the
gentlemen who loaned the money should have known that the
works could never be completed. — The other is a sacred debt — it is
a debt of the orphans and widows. It always took two parties to

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 183

a covenant. Illinois had an agent who stood up for her, but the
orphans had no one. The State laid hold of this sacred fund, and
appropriated it to pay their own expenses; and now, when they
call for their share of the fund, they receive Auditor's warrants.
He was in favor of honesty, and could see no injustice or dishonesty
in the plan now before them. The stocks of the State were not in
the hands of the original holders, but were held by brokers and
stock-jobbers, and if any person desired to buy them up they
were at liberty [to] do so, and at the very lowest price, and why
not Illinois do so with her school fund; particularly when the
fatherless and the orphan, who can never expect a schooling except
by the school fund, were in numbers throughout the State. He
hoped gentlemen would all take it upon themselves to assist the
widow in educating the rising generation, and after that he would
vote for taxation to pay the whole debt. He had been a stickler
for 40 years on the side of honesty, and had fought in the cause of
honesty and religion, and almost 66 cold winters had rolled over
his head while engaged in the study of honesty, yet he had been
unable to discover the least dishonesty in the whole plan.

Mr. ARCHER said, that as this was a mere resolution of
enquiry, he would vote for it. This was a question of the utmost
interest, and this debate which has ensued on a mere resolution
of enquiry gave evidence of the deep feeling on the subject. He
was not disposed to discuss it in its present shape, but would
remark that he could not see those glaring faults in the plan, which
others pretended to have discovered.

Mr. WOODSON advocated the adoption of the resolution,
because, by investing the school fund in this way, no harm could
be done. If he understood the plan, it was to invest a portion or
the whole of the school fund in State bonds, which could be pur-
chased, say at 40 to 50, and thereby double the amount of the
fund, and of the interest that would be distributed for the purpose
of education. Who could be injured by such a plan? Illinois
would be greatly benefitted. The bondholder could not complain,
for the very fact of this investment would enhance the value of
the bonds. If, therefore, it was not unjust to them, was it immoral
to make use of the fund. If not unjust nor dishonest, we have
a right to prefer the credit or whom we will pay. — This was a principle

1 84 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of law, so well settled that no lawyer would deny it. This fund
belongs to the children of the State, and she has a right to invest
it in such a way as is best for their interest. If this plan was not
dishonest, enhanced the value of the bonds, was not unjust, injured
no one, and increased the fund — why should not the Convention
act in the matter? The Legislature had been dishonest in appro-
priating the money, and the Convention should adopt some
measures to close the door against anything further of the kind.
Mr. NORTON was in favor of giving this resolution the course
of all resolutions of enquiry; he would vote for it, but he was not
altogether prepared to vote for the plan set forth by it, because
he feared there might be many serious and unsurmountable
objections to it. He thought well of the school fund, and was
ready to go with anyone, in furthering and advancing the cause,
but he was unwilling to adopt anything unjust or dishonest. If
he understood the proposition correctly, we were to go into market
to buy up our own stock at a depreciated value, and at the loss of
our creditors. — Would they not say to us, it is your duty to educate
your children at your own cost and not ours. He supposed that
no one would say that it would be just were we to buy up our
bonds and thus get rid of the debt, but the excuse for the present
plan is, that it is not for the benefit of the State but for the youth.
Mr. N. then stated the plan in detail, and said, suppose we did
buy up one hundred thousand dollars of the bonds, on which the
State was now paying two per cent., and add it to the school fund,
where we will have to pay six per cent., where would this difference
of four per cent, come from? It would come from our other
creditors and bondholders, for if we were now able only to pay two
per cent, of interest on our debt, would we not be reducing our
means to pay even that, if we paid six per cent, on that portion of
our bonds thus purchased by the school fund. Well might our
creditors say, that we should educate our children ourselves, and
not by using their means. And, sir, there may be persons holding
these bonds who are not able to contribute to the education of our
children, and how can they educate their own children ? He said
the same principles would apply to the State as to individuals.
Suppose, said he, I had a quantity of my paper afloat which I
was unable to pay, and it was worth but 40 cents, at the same

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 185

time there was in my hands a legacy belonging to my child, would
it be honest in me to buy up with this fund a portion of my own
paper, and then, by thus doubling the legacy, devote all my means
to the payment of the interest on my paper thus held by my child?
He thought not. Mr. N pursued the subject at some length,
and, in conclusion, said that he might be wrong in his views, and
if satisfied that it was proper and just, he would go heart in hand
with the gentleman.

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau advocated the plan contained in the
amendment.

Mr. THORNTON made a few remarks in reply to Mr. Norton,
and the question was taken on the amendment proposed by Mr.
Deitz, and it was carried — yeas 76.

The two other amendments were then adopted, and the reso-
lution as amended was passed.

The report of the committee on Education, submitted this
morning, was then taken up.

Mr. GREGG hoped the resolution reported by the committee
would be postponed till Saturday, as the gentleman from Jo
Daviess, who was chairman of the committee, was absent and
would be till that day. He was in favor of the resolution, and
concurred with the gentleman from Madison in every word he
had uttered.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison hoped the resolution would be
postponed.

Mr. CHURCHILL moved to postpone till Tuesday.

Mr. WILLIAMS thought it unnecessary to postpone as the
resolution was one of simple inquiry only, and which might as
well be passed now as at any other time.

Mr. EVEY expressed a similar view.

Mr. GREGG then moved that the subject be postponed till
Monday next.

Mr. KNOWLTON did not think it was necessary for the
chairman of the committee to be here, for a proper discussion of
the subject.

Mr. SERVANT thought the resolution might be referred
without debate, but if they were to debate it he thought courtesy
would favor a postponement.

1 86 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. PINCKNEY advocated a discussion at once, as he under-
stood that the committee had reported the resolution to elicit from
the Convention an expression upon the subject.

Mr. CONSTABLE offered the following amendment to the
resolution :

"Also, as to the propriety of creating a sinking fund connected
with the debt due from the State to the college, school and semi-
nary fund, so as to provide for its early repayment, and the
investment of that fund in the bonds of this State at their market
value, at the same time contemplating the prompt payment of
interest on the bonds so purchased by the said fund."

The amendment was adopted, and the resolution as amended
was passed.

Mr. JONES made a report of the majority of the committee
on the Revenue; which he moved to lay on the table and two
hundred copies be printed.

Mr. THOMAS made a report from the minority of the com-
mittee on the Revenue, which was laid on the table and two
hundred copies order to be printed.

Messrs. Thomas and Z. Casey made some remarks, each
upon the nature of the reports.

[Mr. THOMAS moved that it be laid upon the table and
printed; and accompanied the motion with some remarks in rela-
tion to the views entertained by the minority of the committee.
Revenue, he remarked, lay at the very foundation of government,
and without it a Government could not exist. This being ad-
mitted, he said, the great consideration was in regard to the sub-
jects or objects of taxation. The minority had attempted to
make some specifications in regard to this matter; and their
reason for doing so was, that it was a thing which was not usually
found in the constitutions of other States; and the consequence
was that disputes more frequently arose in the legislatures of
those States, upon the subject of taxation than upon any other
subject. It was desirable, as far as possible, to place this subject
beyond dispute. There had also in this State, been great diffi-
culty and much controversy in regard to the mode of taxation.
That difficulty had grown out of a provision in the constitution of

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 187

Illinois which was not found in many, if in any, of the constitu-
tions of other States, and that was, that property was to be taxed
according to valuation — so that every one should pay a tax in
proportion to the value of the property which he possessed.
This provision of the constitution it was argued by some, excluded
from taxation the persons of citizens, and it was contended that
it took away the right of the State legislature to levy a poll tax;
and that was the reason, perhaps, why no poll tax had been estab-
lished since the organization of the State government. Another
question of great difficulty had arisen, and [was] discussed very
extensively, in the courts of law, in regard to the manner of ascer-
taining the value of property, and what taxes were to be assessed.
There was great difficulty in ascertaining the value of property,
in a large taxable district, because its value was so much a matter
of opinion, that it was hard to get an agreement of opinion from
even three persons in the same county.

It had therefore been contended by some that under the con-
stitution, as it now exists in Illinois, the legislature had no power
to fix a valuation upon the lands throughout the State in any
other manner than by appointing persons to make a valuation;
and the laws which had been passed, and imposed upon the State
ever since it was a State, fixing a valuation and classifying the
lands, were unconstitutional, because, as it was said, the legisla-
ture had no power to do it. That provision of law had been
changed, he believed, in 1828 or '29, and the lands were valued
thereafter according to their true valuation. It was then found
that the revenue of the State fell short, and that we had not the
means of going on with the State government. This made it
necessary for the State government to fix a minimum valuation;
and they fixed it at three dollars per acre. This, he had no doubt,
was done with an honest intent; and it was very possible that the
men who voted for that minimum were satisfied that by doing so
they placed a large quantity of the lands of the State at a valua-
tion greater than they were really worth; but they had no other
mode of getting along. They had to adopt some method, and
this was deemed the most expedient. He supposed that if, in the
same minimum law, there had been a provision that all the lands
should be taxed in proportion to their true value, there would have

1 88 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

been an equality of taxation; because, if the poorest land was
valued at three dollars per acre, it would be easy to calculate
what the richest land would be worth. It was desirable to get
rid of the difficulty under which the government had so long labored
in regard to this matter; and this was the object of the minority
of the committee in reporting a classification, and a valuation by
the legislature. The operation of it would be, that the legislature
would provide for the classification of lands, and there would be
one man appointed in each county to classify it according to
quality and situation; and when this had been done, its valuation
would be found prescribed in the law. This provision, it would
be perceived, was expressly intended for the raising of revenue;
but he hoped that gentlemen would not take fright at it until they
had examined it, and considered the true situation in which the
matter stood, because without some such provision, by which
revenue could be collected, we might as well give up our system
of government at once. A government could not subsist upon
credit. Our auditor's warrants were down to eighty cents in the
dollar, and now the school fund was about to be taken away from
the legislature; without such a provision, therefore, this conven-
tion might as well adjourn, and give up the State. He made
these remarks by way of apology for introducing into the conven-
tion a proposition which looked so strongly for raising a revenue.

It was true that the legislature might so provide as to make
the valuation very small or very large; but there were limitations
on the power of the legislature, and upon the power of the county
officers executing the law, which were essential to certainty in the
assessment and collection of revenue. If these provisions were
omitted in the constitution which was to be formed, the legislative
department would have unlimited power over the subject; and
they would be in the same condition in which they had heretofore
been. He hoped that no gentleman would form an opinion
against the proposition without looking at the consequences which
would result from a different course.

Mr. Z. CASEY said he imagined that the question upon the
merits of the proposition was not now properly before the Con-
vention, the present question being to lay upon the table and print
the report of the minority of the committee. He might be per-

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 189

mitted to say, however, that the difference, as he understood it,
between the two propositions from the committee was simply
this: that, while one proposed to ascertain the worth of property
by a valuation, to be made by inspectors appointed for that pur-
pose, and when the intrinsic worth was ascertained, to fix upon
it a rate of tax sufficient to answer the purposes of government;
the other contemplated that there should be an arbitrary valuation
fixed upon the property. He was opposed to an arbitrary valu-
ation. It seemed to him that the other mode was the proper one;
in all other respects he approved of the report of the majority of
the committee. He would not oppose the printing of the report
of the minority; he hoped it would be printed, that the whole
subject might be brought at once before the convention, and fairly
discussed and decided.]^*

Mr. DEMENT, from the committee on the Legislative
Department, made a report — a motion was made to print — and
then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

" Tliis account of the speeches of Thomas and Casey is taken from the
Sangamo Journal, July 1.

XV. THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Hale.

The motion pending, to print aoo copies of the report of the
Legislative committee, made yesterday, was decided in the
affirmative.

Mr. CONSTABLE introduced a resolution directing the
door-keeper to contract for a sufficient amount of ice for the use
of the members of the Convention.

Mr. SCATES offered an amendment — "for such members as
choose to pay therefor."

Mr. SERVANT offered an amendment — "that no person shall
use any of the said ice unless he furnish his portion of the money
to purchase the same."

Mr. WITT moved to lay the amendments on the table.
Carried.

Mr. SERVANT was opposed to laying the resolution on the
table, if he thought that his constituents were not willing that
he should have a lump of ice in this hot weather he would leave
the Convention and go home in disgust. A motion was made to
lay the resolution on the table, and the yeas and nays were
ordered. They resulted — yeas 108, nays 34.

Mr. ARCHER, from the committee on Organization of
Departments and Officers connected with the Executive Depart-
ment, reported back sundry resolutions, with amendments to the
constitution — that the Auditor of Public Accounts shall be
elected every four years, and a salary of ^1,000; a State Treas-
urer elected for a term of two years, and a salary of J800; a
Secretary of State to hold office same time as Governor, with a
salary of :^8oo; and that the General Assembly should authorize
the advertising for proposals for public printing, to be let out to
the lowest bidder; and that the subject of a State's Attorney be
referred to the committee on Judiciary. Which report, on motion,
was laid on the table, and 200 copies ordered to be printed.

Mr. GREGG, from the committee on the Division of the
190

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 191

State into Senatorial and Representative Districts, reported a
resolution calling for 30 outline maps, and printing 200 copies of
the census. — He stated, that the committee were unanimously of
opinion that the maps should be had. It had been ascertained
that no copies of the census were in the office of the Secretary of
State, as had been suggested the other day, and it would be
conceded that it was necessary they should have the census
printed for their use.

Mr. ECCLES doubted the necessity of procuring the maps.

Mr. WEST said, he had inquired at the Auditor's office and
had been informed that the maps could be furnished by Monday
next, at a cost not exceeding six bits each.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon said, he had a map that had
been furnished him at the last session of the Legislature, which
had cost but 50 cents; it was at the service of the chairman of the
committee. His map had the population of every county marked
upon its face.

Mr. SHUMWAY offered an amendment, "that the number of
free white population in each county should be marked on the
maps." Carried, and then the resolution was adopted.

Mr. SCATES offered a resolution, that the committee on
Finance be directed to inquire into the expediency of reporting a
provision to tax the government lands; which resolution, after
explaining it, he moved be postponed till Wednesday next. —
Carried.

Mr. DAWSON offered a resolution directing an inquiry by
the committee on Rights, to report a prohibition of duelling
Carried.

Mr. WEAD offered a resolution appointing a special committee
of eleven to inquire into the expediency of abolishing the county
commissioners' court, and report a plan of organization of town-
ships. Carried.

Mr. GEDDES offered a resolution that the committee on
Military Affairs should inquire into the expediency of adding to
the 2d section of the 5 th article of the constitution a provision
that all persons who do not perform military duty should pay a
fine of from fifty cents to a dollar, which should be added to the
school fund.

192 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

He said, that from his little experience in such matters, he
had come to the conclusion that our present military organization
was a mere farce. Nine-tenths of the people do no military duty;
he did not know, but supposed it was owing to the inefficiencjy of
the law. It had become so now, that no one but those who
pleased did military duty. If the constitution of the United States
did not require otherwise he would like to see the whole system
abolished. These fines would amount to a considerable amount,
and if added to the school fund would be a good increase. Military
training had become useless, for if they desired to effect anything
they should be kept together a week and do camp duty.

Mr. CHURCH offered an amendment — "that any poll tax
levied and collected shall be in lieu of military duty."

Mr. BROCKMAN opposed any fines for a non-performance
of military duty; he was in favor of a full organization. In his
county they were organized better than in any other in the State,
and they collected no fines.

Mr. SHIELDS moved to lay the resolution and amendment
on the table. Carried.

Mr. ROUNTREE oflFered a resolution that the committee
on the Revenue should be instructed to inquire into the expediency
of reporting a provision in the constitution fixing a maximum rate
of taxation to continue for years.

He said, that he desired that the committee should report a
maximum rate of taxation, beyond which the Legislature could
not go. This course would, in his opinion, do away with much of the
prejudice now felt by emigrants against settling in our State, and
which, owing to our large debt and the necessity for taxation,
deters many from coming here who otherwise would. It would
allay all doubt and uncertanity about the amount of interest each
man would be called upon to pay, and our citizens would be able
to fix a real value upon their land. It would throw light upon the
pathway of the emigrant, and he may be induced to settle in
Illinois instead of seeking more favored lands unburthened with a
public debt. In fixing this maximum, a due regard should be
had to the rates as fixed by our adjacent States, so that we should
not exceed theirs, and turn the tide of emigration from our own
soil into theirs. This was manifest, for if we fixed it at ?2 and

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 193

Missouri at $1, she would get all the emigration, and if we fixed
it too high we would be adopting the best plan of rendering the
surrounding States more advantageous for emigrants than our
own. He thought that, inasmuch as retrenchment would be
carried into the various branches of the government, our present
rate would be sufficient.

Mr. ECCLES suggested that the object of the gentleman
would be accomplished just as well when the reports of the
committee, made yesterday, came before the house, by offering
his plan as an amendment. The majority of the committee had
reported a system of taxation ad valorem, and the minority a
classification and a minimum; when these came properly before
the Convention, if he thought proper to change either, he might
move in the way of amendment.

Mr. ROUNTREE replied, that we had the ad valorem
principle now, and the rate fixed was two mills. The object of
the resolution was to inquire into the expediency of fixing the rate
of the maximum.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery, thought the resolution ought to
pass. He was in favor of fixing in the constitution a rate of taxa-
tion above which the Legislature should never go, and another
rate below which it should not fall. We should settle this matter
permanently and break of[f] the system of demagogueism
practised by candidates for the Legislature. The great theme on
the stump was that we were taxed to death, and that the taxes
should be reduced, and these men came here to carry out this
scheme, and the matter was never settled. It would also
serve the character of the State abroad, when it would be known
that we had fixed in our constitution a permanent rate of taxation
to be applied to the payment of our State debt, and to wipe out
the black stain of repudiation which was upon us.

Mr. SCATES had no objection to a resolution of inquiry but
he was satisfied that this Convention would never adopt amaximum
rate of taxation. Revenue was as vital to a government as blood
is to the human system, and in attempting to measure the amount
of it was too often destructive to the whole system: suppose in a
case^of rebellion or civil insurrection, or of a foreign invasion,
when the whole and the utmost means of the people would be

194 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

required for the defence of the State, we are stopped by a consti-
tutional provision from raising the necessary means to meet the
emergency, a constitutional provision restraining us from in-
creasing the taxes. The only maximum he would vote for would be
50 cents on the dollar, because he believed that half of our property
would be sufficient for any emergency. A maximum by law was
not so bad, because that could be repealed, but not so with one
in the constitution.

Mr. THOMPSON said, that he had had an opportunity of
testing this matter two years ago when travelling in the Eastern
States. He had then an opportunity of becoming acquainted with
the opinions entertained in relation to this State, and was
astonished to hear the deep rooted objections and prejudices
against emigration to this State, on account of our debt. He
returned and on the boat he met some six or seven hundred emi-
grants, and they said they were going to Michigan; he asked them
why not come to Illinois; why not stop at Chicago? They answer-
ed, Illinois has a debt too great. And to carry out what the gen-
tleman from Jefferson said about the life blood of the system —
they added — you touch one jugular, with your heavy taxes, the
very moment we come there. After he had got home, he looked
over some statistics, to see how Illinois stood, in this respect, with
other States in the Union, and found that we stood much
lower than many other States. He believed that if this matter
was left with the General Assembly, it, being governed by patriotic
desires to encourage emigrants, would never have high taxes. He
said that he believed that the prejudices existing against Illinois,
was [sic\ the work of other States, and their agents. He would vote
for the resolution.

Mr. Z. CASEY said, that perhaps it would be proper in him
to state that this subject had been enquired into, and discussed in
committee, and they thought it would be better to report, and let
the Convention fill up the rate of the maximum, below or above
which the Legislature should never go, or at least until certain
objects had been accomplished. He would suggest that as the
committee had reported, it would be as well, when that report
came up, for the gentleman to present his plan, and not to ask the
committee tore-enquire into a question which they had acted upon.

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 195

Mr. ROUNTREE said, he would rather the resolution
should go back to the committee.

Mr. HARVEY said, that he was always in favor of voting for
resolutions of enquiry, but his mind was so made up, and his
opinions so fixed, upon this subject, that for once he would vote
against even a resolution of enquiry. If we were to fix a rate in
the constitution, and the people were to become more able to pay
their debt, here was a barrier against their paying it, except
in the slow means which this rate would allow. He was not afraid
of the debt, or of the people's not paying it. The idea of repudia-
tion is not entertained by any of the people, and he was prepared
to say, for he had not the information before him nor did he know
the amount of the debt, but that the people now were able to pay
the whole amount of interest. He hoped the resolution would
not even go to the people.

Mr. HARDING said, he hoped the resolution would pass. He
was not willing to give the Legislature unlimited power of taxing
the property of the people.

Mr. LOUDON made a few remarks, when the previous ques-
tion was moved and seconded.

And the vote being taken on the adoption of the resolution, it
was carried.

Mr. KENNER offered a resolution, directing the committee
on the Legislative Department to enquire into the expediency of
drafting a provision prohibiting the Legislature from passing any
law the power to pass which is not expressed in the constitution.
And also that the yeas and nays should always be taken on the
final passage of every bill, and that a majority of all the members
elect shall be necessary to pass a bill.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, that as the committee have already
reported on this subject, he moved to lay the resolution on the table.

Mr. THORNTON asked him to withdraw, and he said there
was a difference between the report and resolution.

The resolution was then laid on the table.

Mr. KITCHELL offered a resolution, directing &c., the
committee on Law Reform to provide for a prohibition of the
Legislature amending any general law, till the same be published.
Carried.

196 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. CHURCHILL offered a resolution, appointing a com-
mittee to inquire into the agricultural, mineralogical and other
resources of State; which was carried.

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough offered a resolution,
directing the president to issue certificates to the members for the
amount of their pay and mileage to the 24th inst.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean, moved to lay the resolution on the
table; which was lost.

Mr. CONSTABLE hoped the resolution would not pass till
its propriety had been discussed. Though he did not admit that
we were governed by the law of the Legislature, still as it was the
opinion of the Convention, we should conform to its provisions.
He doubted whether we had the power to withdraw money from
the treasury until we had completed the session.

Mr. GEDDES, though not himself in want of money, there
might be some gentleman who had need of the money, and they
ought to be permitted to have it.

Mr. PALMER, of Macoupin, read from the law, and said,
there was no force in the objection and the only question was,
should the members have it. He thought they ought, and the
objection was untenable.

Mr. WOODSON offered an amendment to the resolution,
"that such sum should not exceed two dollars a day."

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, moved to lay the amendment on the
table; the yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted, yeas 78, nays
60.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to amend by adding that "the
president should issue such certificates every Saturday."

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, he was not wealthy nor
had he much money, but in case he did, he had friends from whom
he could obtain what he wanted. But he could not understand
how gentlemen, who had voted in the Legislature for four dolls,
a day for themselves and for this Convention, and who had voted
to take the gold and silver from the treasury, belonging to the
school fund, and to the children of the State, to pay themselves
with, should now be found voting for this amendment. He
regretted this^proposition to take ^2 a day had been introduced.

He would,iin due course of time, introduce a resolution pro-

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 197

viding that those who voted for and presented resolutions allowing
members $2 a day should be compelled to take only what they
voted for, and then let gentlemen come forward with their patriot-
ism and Buncumbe resolutions in proper style.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, it was not very difficult to see that
the remarks of the gentleman were directed to him; and he wished
to say a few words in explanation of his course in the Legislature,
not because any feeling had been excited, for he felt not in any
way the force of the remarks. He had performed his duty as a
member of the Legislature; the manner in which he had performed
that duty had been before his constituents, and he flattered himself
that they had shown their approval of his conduct. He was not
a ?2 a day man. He had voted for paying the members of the^
Legislature ^4 a day, and had voted for allowing the members of
this Convention ?4 a day, because he thought that sum not
too much.

He then explained at length in relation to the appropriation
of the money belonging to the school fund. He said that there
were men here who held Auditor's warrants — speculators and
brokers — and who hearing that the money was in the treasury
were about to demand it; and the Treasurer had recommended
them to appropriate it to the payment of their expenses.

Messrs. MINSHALL, DAVIS, of Montgomery, and CON-
STABLE continued the debate.

Mr. WILLIAMS thought that the Convention should feel
themselves under great obligations to the members of the last
Legislature, for their kind provision for them of $4 a day. And
that we should be more kind and tender towards them in our
speeches. They had assumed all the responsibility of making
this provision for us and we should feel quite comfortable under
their provision, and should speak more kindly of them. He had
voted for our receiving but %2 a day, because if we were going to
cut down the pay of all future Legislatures we should fortify our
precept by our example.

Mr. BOND explained the object he had in view in offering the
resolution which he did at the opening of the Convention.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac said, that he was in thelastLegislature
and had voted for J4 a day, because he thought that sum

198 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

was not too much. He had not voted for the bill calling for this
Convention, because he considered some of its provisions uncon-
stitutional; however, if the item appropriating $4 a day for the
pay of the members of this Convention had been an isolated item,
he would have voted for it. The course of the gentleman from
Wabash was highly honorable, and tended to break up the spirit
of demagoguism. He hoped that they would not leave this
Convention until they had fixed the pay of the members of the
Legislature at a permanent sum; and thus break up all this
contrivance and management about the pay of the members of
the Legislature. He was now as he was at the session of the
Legislature, and when the appropriation came up to pay the
members $4 a day, he had voted for it, because he thought it was
not too much for a faithful member of the General Assembly. He
did not think we had power to repeal that part of the act of the
Legislature which provides for the pay of the members of this
Convention; and he had no doubt that if such an act were done
that a madamus could be got out and the officer compelled to pay
the sum fixed by law. He believed that there were but a very
few of the members of the last Legislature in the Convention, but
a majority of those who were here were ^4 men.

Messrs. Woodson, Davis of Montgomery, Logan, Constable
and Servant, continued the debate; which, between the two first,
became rather excited and warm, and which was prolonged to
much length by explanation, queries, &c.

A motion to adjourn was taken and lost.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin, said, it was to be regretted that
so much feeling had been shown — they should learn to take every
thing in good feeling, and to give back in the same spirit. He
came here from a county where they took and gave everything.
He had come here to receive $4 per day, and when he was elected
his constituents knew how much he was to receive, and they knew
also that he would not take anything less. Gentlemen had
insinuated that those who were disposed- to take the $4 per
day sheltered themselves behind the act of the Legislature. He
sheltered himself behind no law. If there was no law, he would
vote for ^4 a day, because he thought it was no more than just.
He would use no special pleading, but he would meet them in the

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 199

general issue. He had listened with his accustomed admiration
to what had fallen from the gentleman from Sangamon and
admired its ingenuity. He had admired that gentleman from the
first time he made his acquaintance, for his never-failing ingenuity,
and he did not know but that it was, in some degree, owing to the
fact that the very first case he (Mr. P.) had in the supreme court
the gentleman from Sangamon had trembled him out of it.

He hoped the resolution would pass. Many of the members
may want the money, and he appealed to the gentleman from
Wabash to withdraw his amendment. Although, said he, I would
not care if the money could be drawn out weekly. He knew what
he could do with it. And there were many of his constituents
who would be very glad to receive weekly remittances from him.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, that after the good natured speech of
the gentleman, he would withdraw his amendment.

And the resolution was passed.

Motions to adjourn till to-morrow at 8 1-2 and 9 and 10, a. m.,
and till this afternoon at 7, 6 1-2, 6 and 5 were made and lost.

And then the Convention adjourned to meet at 4 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. ROBBINS offered the following resolution:
Resolved, That the committee to provide for the alteration and
amendment of the constitution inquire into the expediency of
amending article 7th of the constitution, by substituting in place
thereof, the following, to-wit: Whenever two-thirds of the
General Assembly of this State shall think it necessary to alter
or amend this constitution, they shall propose such alterations or
amendments to the people, and it shall be the duty of the Governor,
by proclamation, to lay the same before the people, at least four
months before the next ensuing election for members of the General
Assembly; and if a majority of all the members of both branches
of the General Assembly, elected at the said election, shall approve
of all or part of the said proposed amendments, the amendment
or amendments so approved of, shall be submitted to the people
for their ratification or rejection, and such amendments as shall
be so ratified by a majority of the legal voters of this State shall
become a part of the constitution.

20O ILUNOIS mSTOmCAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. KITCHELL offered a substitute, instructing the com-
mittee to report an article, &c., differing slightly with the original.

Mr. ECCLES moved to amend the substitute by making it a
resolution of inquiry.

Mr. KITCHELL said, he had drawn this substitute with a view
of taking the sense of the Convention. The vote being taken, the
amendment was carried.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac moved to lay the subject on the table.
Lost.

Mr. DEITZ offered an amendment, that amendments to
the constitution should not be submitted but once in five years.
Lost.

And the vote being taken on the substitute, it resulted — yeas
40, nays 41. No quorum.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison moved to lay the substitute on
the table — yeas 61, nays 37. No quorum.

Mr. WITT moved a call of the Convention, and afterwards
withdrew it; and the vote being taken on laying the substitute on
the table was decided in the affirmative.

Mr. KENNER offered an amendment.

Mr. SCATES said, he had no objection to a resolution of
inquiry, but he would oppose the principle of giving the Legislature
power to propose amendments to the constitution. They would
never let it alone, but at every session would be tinkering at it.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, if there was any force in the remarks
of the gentleman they would apply as well to the constitution of
the United States, which allowed amendments to be proposed at
any time; yet he did not see that Congress was very often tinkering
the constitution. The gentleman seemed to think that the con-
servative principles of the State was [sic] collected in that Conven-
tion, and that when we went away it would be forever lost; that
the Legislature nor anybody else would ever go right; that all the
wisdom of the State was centered in that Convention, and in
the gentleman from Jefferson (Mr. Scates) particularly.

Mr. BROCKMAN agreed with the gentleman from Jefferson.
He thought stability was required for our safe government, and
that our constitution should not be left open for amendment. He
felt confident that the Legislature would be always at work upon it.

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 201

Mr. WHITNEY, though he admired the gentleman from
Jefferson for the ardor and sincerity with which he supported every
view taken by him in the Convention, he was compelled to disagree
with him on this subject. He (Mr. W.) had lived in a State where
such a provision was in the constitution, and from the years 1821
to 1836 there had been but few amendments proposed — not more
than four or five.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved the previous question —
seconded and the resolution was adopted.

Mr. McCALLEN offered a resolution in relation to military
affairs, but withdrew it at the suggestion of Mr. Whiteside, who
said the committee were ready to report.

Mr. CONSTABLE offered a resolution, that the committee
on Bill of Rights inquire, &c., of omitting the restrictions upon
those people who had rights in common in certain lands, and con-
tained in article 8, section 8, of the present constitution.

Mr. SERVANT said, that he had several petitions on the sub-
ject, and had written home for some information, and when it
arrived he would like them all to go together before the committee.

Mr. CONSTABLE then withdrew his resolution.

Mr. SPENCER offered a resolution that the committee on
Rights be, &c., report a provision that property of married women
be exempt from execution. Adopted.

Mr. LOGAN offered an additional rule that two-thirds of the
members shall be necessary to constitute a quorum for business,
but that a less number might order a call of the Convention and
adjourn. Carried.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL offered a resolution calling upon the
Auditor for certain information. Adopted.

Mr. VERNOR offered a resolution that the committee on
Legislative Business should inquire, &c., and prohibit any person
holding two lucrative offices at one time. Carried.

Mr. KENNER offered a resolution referring to county organ-
ization; which on motion, was laid on the table till 4th of July, 1849.

Mr. BOND offered a resolution that the committee on Rights
be instructed to report a provision prohibiting free negroes from
emigrating into this State, and that no person shall bring slaves

202 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

into this State from other States and set them free, and that
sufficient penalties be provided to effect the object in view.

He said, that he thought this the proper time to give this
question a fair and calm discussion, and had so framed the resolu-
tion as a test. He proceeded to give his reasons for introducing
the resolution, and to state the grounds he occupied on this
question. In doing so, he said, he had no desire to wound the
feelings of any delegate, or impugn the motives which governed
other gentlemen who occupied a different position. There was
no one who had a greater desire to do justice to that class of un-
fortunate individuals, called free negroes. But they already had
become a great annoyance, if not a nuisance, to the people of
Illinois. While he would do the utmost to protect the rights of
those who held this kind of property, which was recognized by the
domestic institutions of sister States, he would do nothing to
fasten more tightly the bonds by which these people were held in
slavery. In his part of the State he had seen little settlements of
these free negroes spring up, and their object was to aid slaves
from the south to escape their masters. This was not right. But
while he would not go to a man's stable, unlock it, and steal there-
from a horse, he might, if he met a negro whom he thought was
escapmg from his master, not ask the man to give an account of
himself, and thereby stop him in his flight. He considered that
there was no use of extending our philanthropy in favor of these
people, unless we were willing to admit them to the privilege of
the ballot box, and give them all the rights of freemen and citizens
of a free republic. Can we, or ought we to, do this? He would
answer nay. After alluding to the objects of colonization, he
said, that he wanted no persons to come into this State, unless
they came with right to be our equals in all things, and as freemen."

Mr. LOUDON offered an amendment; which was ruled out
of order.

Mr. BROCKMAN said, that the people of his county were
unanimous in their opposition to the emigration [jzV] of negroes. The
people of Schuyler and Brown were nearly all opposed to it. The
negroes have no rights in common with the people, they can have

^A much longer account of Bond's speech may be found in the Sangamo
Journal, July 1.

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1S47 203

no rights; the distinction between the two races issogreat as to pre-
clude the possibility of their ever living together upon equal terms.

Mr. ADAMS moved to amend by striking out all after the
word "resolved" and inserting the following: "the Legislature
shall have no power to pass laws of a severe or oppressive character
applicable to persons of color."

A motion to lay the amendment on the table was made, and
the yeas and nays were ordered and taken — yeas 92, nays 46.

Messrs. Church and Pinckney explained their position on
this question.

Mr. CYRUS EDWARDS* name being called, he rose and said,
that if the vote were taken without a word of explanation, it
might be inferred that those in favor of laying the amendment on
the table, would be in favor of the adoption of the converse propo-
sition to that contained in the amendment. He wished to exclude
that conclusion, as far as he was concerned, and he would there-
fore state that he should vote for laying the amendment on the
table, under a rule which he had prescribed for himself, that in
those points where he considered the constitution to be correct
as it stands, he would make no attempt to alter it; and in relation
to this subject, he considered the constitution as it stands could
not be improved by any alteration.

Mr. LOGAN'S name being called, he rose and said that he
thought it was necessary to make a brief explanation. It was a
subject of a good deal of delicacy and one upon which it was diffi-
cult at all times clearly to distinguish between judgment and pre-
judice. He should vote to lay this amendment on the table,
however, upon the ground that he regarded it more in the light
of an abstract proposition than anything else. The question as
to what laws would be oppressive, was one for the consideration
of the legislature, and one which ought to be left to their judgment
to determine.

Mr. MINSHALL'S name being called, he observed, that he
considered such a provision as that embraced in this amendment
wholly superfluous, and, he thought, the constitution, therefore,
ought not to be encumbered with it. He would vote for laying
the amendment on the table.

204 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. SERVANT'S name being called, he said he adopted the
reasons stated by the gentlemen from Madison and Sangamon,
and would vote yea.

The yeas and nays being taken they resulted as follows: —
yeas 92, nays 46.

The question then being on the adoption of the resolution —

Mr. BOND desired the yeas and nays.

Mr. CHURCH would not make a speech, but desired to offer
a few remarks. Gentlemen characterized what he deemed sound
principles on the subject under discussion, as abstractions. His
object was not to deal in abstractions, but to view matters in the
light of common sense. It had been stated that nature had set
up a barrier against blacks as a race, and that the privileges of
common humanity should not be extended to them. If this be
so, nature was wrong; which he was not willing to admit. This
doctrine was behind the spirit of the age, and if we were to sustain
it, we should be the objects of scorn to the world. Would emi-
grants from Pennsylvania and others imbued with sentiments of
humanity, come to this State, if the proposition made here in
relation to blacks were to become a part of our organic law? No,
sir; and they would regard such a provision as violating, not only
the plain dictates of humanity, but the principles contained in the
great charter of our rights — the Declaration of Independence.
He desired that on the subject of slavery, the Constitution should
leave it where it was left by the Ordinance of '87 — that there shall
be no slavery or involuntary servitude in the State. Our present
constitution provides for slavery as it existed when adopted; and
although susceptible of a different construction, slavery was con-
tinued for years, under the juggling of courts in their judicial
decisions. Gentlemen here have gloried in this as a free State.
He would indeed glory in such a State. And he was therefore
opposed to engrafting in the constitution any doubtful provision,
or one which required every officer of the government, from the
Governor down, to be a picket guard, to oppress the colored race.

He wanted the constitution to be worthy of a free State — and
to render it so, he would not have it, in the remotest degree, nor
by any possible construction, sanction slavery, or oppress the
colored race. He was opposed to laws on this subject, which

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 205

were a blot upon our statute book, but would leave that matter
with the legislature, with the confident hope that the dictates of
humanity would control the action of that body, when it shall
convene under the amended constitution, if we shall be so fortu-
nate as to perfect a constitution which shall receive the sanction
of the people.

Mr. CHURCH moved to lay the resolution on the table.

At the request of Mr. PINCKNEY the motion was with-
drawn.

Mr. PINCKNEY said: Mr. President, I hope the motion to
lay upon the table will be withdrawn, that I may have an oppor-
tunity of explaining.

It was not my purpose to agitate this question unless it were
forced upon me; and I should have said nothing upon these resolu-
tions of the gentleman from Clinton, had not the ayes and nays
been called.

But as the case now stands, and driven as I now am, and have
before been into a kind of dilemma, I claim and shall take the
privilege of explaining myself. I have been, by what I consider
the indiscreet zeal of gentlemen from the North and South, called
upon to place my vote upon the journal, on questions that it did
not suit my views either to favor or oppose, in the shape in which
they were presented to the convention, but nevertheless, I voted
unflinchingly, and without any effort at an explanation.

I am willing, sir, to occupy this position in silence no longer;
the position is one forced upon me. It is a very singular position.
How does it happen that at the North I am termed a pro-slavery
man; and here, by some, an Abolitionist? How does it occur that
in passing from my home to this place, about aoo miles, I find my
principles identically the same, viewed in so different a light? I
know not, except it be that I occupy a middle ground between
two parties contending with each other, and as all mediators are,
I am obliged to receive the blows and balls of both.

An Abolitionist! Why, Mr. President, I would as soon be
called almost anything else on earth as a political abolitionist;
and yet, I suppose I must patiently bear it, as there is no remedy.

The gentleman from Clinton has again sprung this question
upon me, and the ayes and noes are called. To let it pass as I

2o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

have others touching the same points, I cannot; and yet, I will
barely explain.

The gentleman says, the time for action upon this subject has
come, and we must defend our State. My own opinion was that
the time had not come, and therefore I wished to let the matter
rest; but, if the gentleman is correct, and the proper time is here
in which we should act, it would seem as though we should first
wipe out the dark stain that now rests upon our State. It be-
comes us to remove the foul stigma, which some of our odious
laws have brought upon us. I most unhesitatingly assert here
before this body, and am willing to declare it before the world,
that some of our late laws touching the treatment of negroes are
a disgrace to our State; they would be a disgrace to any people
claiming to be free, enlightened and humane.

The gentleman has an object in view in moving these resolu-
tions— he would show by making them a part of our constitution —
by keeping negroes out of our State under a heavy penalty, that
we are determined to protect the rights of our sister States.
Rights! What rights? The right to chase an oppressed and un-
fortunate fellow being through our territory; to drag him to
prison; to beat him, and at the same time to prohibit me, or any
man on this floor from giving him a morsel of bread or meat,
though he be starving? A right to compel us to force a perishing
woman from our door; and drive her forth into the pitiless peltings
of the midnight storm! Are these their rights? I can not admit
them; they conflict with higher authority. They fly in the face
of Jehovah. His law calls upon me to feed the hungry and succor
the distressed. This with me settles all; and I shall endeavor ro
obey it, notwithstanding these rights.

Do not misunderstand me; while I would feed the unfortunate
hungry negro, I would take no part in stealing or secreting him.
The gentleman would put a stop to the system of stealing negroes
and running them off through our State. He cannot more strong-
ly disapprobate the " under ground railroad " than do I. It is a
disgrace to any man to be aiding or abetting that system. I look
with supreme contempt upon that man who enters the premises
of a master for the purpose of enticing away his slave; who teaches
that slave to escape at all hazards; to cut his master's throat; to

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 207

steal his best horse, to ride him to death, and then steal another.
These things I cannot approve, nor can I commend; nay, I must
censure those who countenance them.

The gentleman says, if among us, they are not to have a vote,
nor to hold office. My vote stands recorded upon this subject,
and it agrees with his views. I am not for passing laws to give
them the right of suffrage, but for a different reason from the
gentleman's. It is simply this: no class of men in our popular
government can enjoy equal rights and privileges with us, until
the mass are willing to grant the same, all legislation to the con-
trary notwithstanding. This alone is sufficient to determine my
course with reference to the African suffrage. The people will
not yield it. If any man propose to keep these unfortunate per-
sons from our State by just and humane measures, I shall not
object. I am in favor of removing them not only from this State,
but from all the States, that they may in some other place enjoy
human rights and privileges, in truth as well as in name; but I
desire it not to be done by violence. I therefore concur with the
gentlemen in giving the Colonization Society great praise; it
deserves it; it has my best wishes and my warm support.

The gentleman from Brown expressed a view that I was sorry
to hear on this floor. Is it possible that he would rather see this
a slave State, than have it longer exposed to the ingress of negroes?
Is it true that God has made so broad a mark of distinction be-
tween blacks and whites, that the latter cannot endure the prox-
imity of the former? My observations here teach me that they
are somewhat intimate; but I forbear to dwell on what is so appar-
ent to all, and I leave the subject.

Mr. TURNBULL said he considered this matter as properly
belonging to the legislature, if it were necessary to make any en-
actment in relation to it; but he was of the opinion that as it
stood at present it was about as well as they could make it.
Nothing was to be gained, he thought, by agitating the question.]^^

Mr. ALLEN said, he saw nothing in the resolutions to call out
this discussion. He had listened to the gentleman last up (Mr.

''^This account, the closing debate of the afternoon session of June 24,
is taken from the Sangamo Journal, July 1.

2o8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Pinckney) in his effort to define his position, but really did not
know where he stood; on which side, or on both sides. He could
not see what this resolution had to do with the present statute
laws of the State. It only provided that no negroes should come
here for the future. He was in favor of a prohibitory clause
against their emigration [sic\ into the State, for those that were
here were good for nothing, either to the state, the church, or
themselves. They were all idle and lazy and the part of the State
that he came from was overrun with them. It had been the custom
for some time for the people of Kentucky, Alabama and other
states to bring their old and worn out negroes, and those whom
they emancipated, into this State and into his section of country,
and the people desired to prevent this, and to get rid of those
already there.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin thought the introduction of this
subject was unwise and productive of no good. Almost all the
evil growing out of the excitement upon this question had been "
produced by the persons occupying the extremes of both parties.
On the one side were those who were honest, sincere and consistent
in their opinion, and men of the most respectable character, who
devote all their zeal, ardor and means for the accomplishment of
their object; men of the one idea principle; and on the other side
was a class of persons who, to check abolition, used the most
violent language and often occupied very untenable ground, and
they together have contributed, more than anything else, to create
the great excitement on this question. He would ask gentlemen
to reflect upon the consequences of this resolution. If it was
adopted and its provisions inserted in the constitution, a large
class of the community would be against its adoption. Why then
unnecessarily provoke a battle against the constitution. Intemper-
ance on one side was as bad as on another. Every impulse of his heart
and every feeling of his, was in opposition to slavery, and if his
acts or votes here would do anything to ameliorate the condition
of those held in bondage no man would exert himself more zealously
than he; no one would do more to remove the great stain of moral
guilt now upon this great republic — but he looked upon every
proposition either for or against that object as checking the good

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1847 209

work, and sooner than adopt such a proposition as is now before
them, every vote in his county would go to sustain the old consti-
tution.

Mr, EDWARDS of Sangamon moved an adjournment.
Carried.

XVI. FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Barger.

Mr. THORNTON offered an -amendment to the resolution
pending at the adjournment yesterday — providing that the Legis-
lature should have power to make all necessary laws in relation to
negroes. In presenting the amendment he said, that he did so
because he thought we should leave the matter with the Legislature
for their action, and to public sentiment.

Mr. NORTON said, that he desired to state the reasons which
would govern him in his vote upon this question, and why he
should vote against the resolution and the amendment. He was
happy to say that he did not find himself in the dilemma in which
other gentlemen were placed. He opposed this resolution because
he deemed it wrong in principle and wrong in practice, and could
give the reasons for going against it without feeling himself called
upon to define his position. He would give his views, founded,
as he thought, upon principles of right. The resolution, as he
understood it, had two objects — the first, the exclusion, by penal
enactments, of all free negroes; the second, a prohibition against
their emancipation and settlement in this State. The first of
these he considered a direct infring[e]ment of the constitution
of the United States, which he, as a member of the Convention,
had taken an oath to support, and which was regarded as the
glory of the country, and gave us a character abroad. No one
would contend that we had the power to infringe that constitution
in any of its provisions. That constitution says, "that the
citizens of one State shall be entitled to all the privileges and
immunities in the several States."

This resolution prohibits free negroes from coming into the
State. Does that sacred instrument — the constitution of the
United States — say "white" citizens. No, sir, you may
search in vain in that instrument for the word white, or black, or
yellow. What citizens does the constitution recognize ?— -All
native born and naturalized citizens. He would refer gentlemen
I 210

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847 211

to the State of Vermont, no distinction is made in her constitution;
there these people have all the priv[i]leges possessed by the whites;
they have property and a right to vote. Go to Massachusetts,
where he thought they had a little notion of what was liberty —
government and right, and there they are entitled to hold property,
a right to vote, and, in theory, if not in practice, a privilege of a
seat in the General Assembly. These men are citizens of those
States. Can we say then that a citizen of Massachusetts, Vermont
or New York shall be prohibited from settling in the State of
Illinois, in direct violation of an article of the constitution of the
United States? If that constitution can be violated in one provi-
sion, it can be in another. Was any such distinction contemplated
at the adoption of that constitution? Do you think that the men
who framed that constitution would ever have permitted the word
"white" to go into the constitution? Every delegate in the
Ganvention that framed that constitution from the North — from
Virginia and Maryland, would have voted against it. And if they
had put it in, the constitution would never [have] been adopted by the
people. He came not there to produce excitement by a discussion
on this subject. He would rather have avoided it, but by the
introduction of this resolution the question had been forced upon
them. He would ask the gentleman who introduced this resolu-
tion, if he remembered the time, when it was attempted to put
such a provision as this in the constitution of Missouri, how the
whole north opposed it, and that Missouri could never have been
admitted into the Union with that provision in her constitution,
without some explanatory clauses. The people would have let
her fall into the dust before they would have consented. He was
not prepared to say that those born in servitude and yet slaves are
citizens, this question did not arise, and he was not disposed to
argue it. The first principle of this resolution is unequal, unjust
and opposed to the first principles of free government. These
colored people came to this country not of their own accord, we
brought them here, they cannot get away; it is said to colonize
them, how? they cannot colonize themselves. He would not
insert a provision inviting them to our State; nor would he have
one to prohibit them. Is it just, equal or republican to say in our
constitution that an honest colored man, with property and per-

212 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

haps education, shall not come to this State because some men
of color who are here are lazy? Our armies were now fighting at
the south and the probability is that we will extend the area of
our freedom, and that States are to come into the Union with
people of every stripe and color, and can they come in without
full and equal rights? If this clause be inserted into the consti-
tution he would guaranty 10,000 votes against it, and in the
county of Will he would guaranty a majority of 1,000. The
whole north would oppose it. This resolution was the very thing
to produce excitement; such things had been always the cause of
it all over the length and breadth of the land. Having thus
justified his vote, he did not consider he should define his position.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery was not desirous of discussing
this subject; but while he was sitting there, willing to let resolu-
tions of inquiry, to which he was opposed, pass in silence, he was
not willing that gentlemen should tell him that the green north
was opposed to this and that subject, and if it passed, the green
north would defeat it. Gentlemen get up here and unblushingly
say that negroes are equal to them, and unblushingly say that
they should enjoy all the privileges of life, social and political, and
then charge the south with having caused the excitement. Who
first introduced this matter by a motion to strike the word
'white' out of a resolution, and then moved the yeas and nays
upon it. A gentleman from the north. It was the north
that had caused this excitement and not the south. When,
sir, I get up here and advocate that negroes are entitled to
all the privileges of citizenship — social and political — I hope the
tongue which now speaks may cleave to the roof of my mouth.
There is a barrier between the two races which it is vain to attempt
to destroy. He had not arisen to discuss this matter and create
excitement, but to repudiate the assertion that our morals should
justify us in admitting negroes to the enjoyment of our social and
political rights. The gentlemen from the north speak their
sentiments, and those of the south have the same right. He said
that the object of the abolitionists was to dissolve the Union.
He had no more confidence in the abolitionists than he had in the
dark and damnable demons of the lower regions.

Mr. NORTON rose— but

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847 213

Mr. WILLIAMS claimed the floor as a peacemaker. He said
the people had gone to great expense in calling this Convention to
reform and revise the government, and not for the purpose of
speaking or making provisions about negroes or other little things.
There was \sic\ the Legislative and Judiciary Departments which
required reformation, and it was for this object that the people
sent them there. He regretted that in carrying out these prin-
ciples they had permitted those subjects to be introduced. He
had no fault to find with the mover of the resolution or with those
who differ from him.

The question was not an abolition one, nor one to admit
negroes to social and political equality — but simply, will we permit
negroes, after they have given security not to become a burden
upon the Stat€, and complied with our laws, to the poor privilege
of cultivating our soil and breathing our air. He was not inviting
them to come to the State. The African race had been degraded,
not from their own crimes, but they had been raised in servitude
and without education. Take the heroes of Buena Vista and
Cerro Gordo and carry them into a foreign land, and subject
them to servitude, and the 4th generation will be as degraded as
the negro race. Mr. W. cited several cases which had come under
his notice of negroes working and toiling for money with which
they desired to purchase friends and relations then in slavery.
In conclusion he said, the resolution was more suited for the 14th
than the 19th century.

Mr. WITT moved the previous question.

Mr. LOGAN said, that this was a subject which he had always
expected would agitate this Convention. At the same time, it
was one which he hoped gentlemen would learn to discuss with
temper. — He hoped that the discussion would proceed and with
good temper, and that the Convention would listen calmly to
what was to be advanced for and against the proposition. He
trusted that the gag law would not be put in force on a question
which a large number of the people considered of vital importance.
He was not afraid to discuss any question on God's earth. He
respected the abolitionists and believed them to be honest and
sincere, and was willing to listen to what they had to say. He
was certain the result would be to leave the constitution as it now

214 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

is. The question was one which affected the interests and feelings
of a large population of the State, not only abolitionists but
others, and he was desirous that their representatives might be
heard. Mr. SHIELDS thought that as the question had been
discussed so fully in Congress and in other places, no new light
could be thrown upon the matter now by a longer discussion.

Mr. HURLBUT hoped the previous question would not be
seconded. There was no use in dodging the question, which might
as well be settled now as at any other time. He was not to be
affected by taunts from the north, nor will he suffer them to
be thrown in his teeth from the south. He would discuss it on ■
principles of law and morals.

Mr. DEMENT said, he would vote to sustain the previous
question, because he intended to vote upon the question with those
gentlemen who desired to be heard. He had heard sufficient from
them, even before the discussion, to induce him to go with them
on this particular subject. He hoped, therefore, they would not
think hard of him when he voted for the previous question. He
did not care for hearing an argument when his mind was made up.

Mr. SERVANT opposed the previous question.

Mr. WEST said, that although he was a young man, he did
hope the previous question would not be seconded, because he had
a desire to express his views on the subject. The county he
represented had more of this population than almost any other,
and he knew his constituents desired that their representatives
might be heard. He would discuss the question with a proper
temper.

Mr. MINSHALL was not afraid to hear the discussion upon
this or any other subject; and he thought that if any steam had
been engendered that it would be better to let it off at once.

Messrs. Hogue, Davis of Montgomery, and Mason, all
opposed the previous question, and advocated a discussion now.
And the vote was taken and the previous question was not
seconded.

Mr. MASON moved to lay the resolution on the table, and
that all the laws in relation to negroes be printed.

Mr. KITCHELL moved to lay the motion on the table. A
division of the question was demanded, and the motion to print

FRIDAY, JUf^E 25, 1847 215

was laid on the table. The question was then taken on laying on
the table the motion to lay on the table, and decided in the
negative.

Mr. HURLBUT said, he desired to discuss this question
without branching off into a discussion of collateral subjects, or
exciting angry feelings. He said he would rather vote for the
resolution than for the amendment, because it was more direct;
but he would vote against both upon principle. The constitution
of the U. S. says, a citizen of one State shall be entitled to all the
privileges and immunities of citizens of the other States. It is not
in the power of the Convention to infringe this — they cannot get
over it. A citizen of Massachusetts was entitled to become a
citizen of any other State. The south had raised an enquiry
whether the colored persons have the rights of citizenship; that
question was not applicable here. The question was, have we the
power to say that citizens of those States shall not come here. It
will not do for Illinois to say that other States have not the power
to make citizens, when she has made citizens of a class of persons
in a way unknown to other States. Suppose we should pass a
law that a citizen of New York shall not come into this State, how
will you enforce it? The constitution of the U. S. directly over-
rules it. As to the policy of the law: the gentlemen from the
counties on the Mississippi, say they suffer from these free negroes
— that is one of the evils of all frontier States; that they come
there and are a bad population. But have we the power to make
a penal law applicable to one class of citizens, and not generally.
No doubt the State has power to pass a general law requiring all
persons coming into the State, to give a bond not to become a
burden on the State. N. York has the power to pass a law,
requiring captains of emigrant vessels to observe certain restric-
tions, but that is only the exercise of an internal police regulation
and is general. Let us make a law as applicable to those who
come into the State at the north, as well as those at the south,
one is as good as the other and the only difference is, that one is
white and the other black. Let the law be general; but if we pass
a sweeping general law, which is special in its application, it must
be apparent that it is unconstitutional. It was a thing which he
never would consent to. He was not sufficiently acquainted with

21 6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

those parts of the State affected by these people to know if these
laws are required; but he would believe the statements of the
gentlemen, as it was not his design to impugn the assertions of
anyone. He would vote against the resolution, if on no other
ground, because its adoption would endanger the ratification of
the constitution.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair said, that the present question was
one in which his county felt a very lively interest. It was situated
near St. Louis; they had already nearly five hundred free colored
persons collected there from Missouri, and they were perfectly
familiar with their habits. He was satisfied that a large majority
of the people of his county would vote to sustain the resolution of
the gentleman from Clinton. Those members from the northern
part of the State did not know how lazy, and good-for-nothing
these people were. If they did and could witness their worth-
lessness their opinions would be changed. He was in favor of a
fair and calm discussion of this question and saw no necessity for
excitement. It had nothing to do with abolition and abolitionists,
and appeared to him a mere question of State policy — a political
question. It has been said by the gentleman from Will (Mr.
Norton) that he has objections to this resolution because it
infringes the constitution of the United States. He says that it
guaranties to citizens of one State the rights and privileges of
citizens of other States. He forgets that that article of the consti-
tution has been construed to mean that citizens from other States
shall be entitled only to the rights enjoyed by the citizens of the
State into which they came. Have we not by our present consti-
tution prohibited them from voting — a right enjoyed by citizens
of our State — and has not that constitution been ratified by the
Congress of the United States. He says we have the power to
put these negroes under bond not to become a charge upon the
State — this admission is all we want. Suppose a citizen of
another State should come here, could we compel him to give this
bond ? No, sir; we could not. His argument, therefore, is ground-
less. To carry it out, suppose in another State a negro was
entitled to hold an ofiice, and he came here to this State, would he
not be entitled to hold office here too? The supreme court of the
United States says that citizens of one State shall enjoy the same

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847 217

privileges as are enjoyed by citizens of the other States. The
gentleman from Boone says he holds not to the grounds of the
abolitionists, yet, he, (Mr. K.) was much surprised to hear him
say that the foreigners, who come to our State, were no better
than the negroes. It is not good policy to engraft upon our
constitution — the fundamental law of the State — a prohibition
against this class of worthless population, and his reason for it
was that we are surrounded by a number of slave States, all of
whom had an exclusive provision in their constitution against
these free negroes. Where, then, do they go? They cannot
reside in those States, and they all come into Illinois. When they
getold,decrepid [sic] and good-for-nothing, their owners emancipate
them and send them into this State. We may have laws upon
our statute books against persons bringing or sending them here, but
howcan we enforce it against a man in another State. Hewouldask
gentlemen to look at Ohio, the greatest abolition State in the
Union, and when Randolph's negroes were emancipated the agent
attempted to settle them in that State, but the people rose in a
body and drove them back and would not allow them to come
there. They did not want them, they knew what sort of a popu-
lation they were, and how worthless and degraded they become,
and how troublesome they always were. If we would allow the
negroes any kind of equality we must admit them to the social
hearth. It was then that equality commenced. We must live
with them and permit them to mingle with us in all our social
affairs, and, also, if they desired it, must not object to proposals
to marry our daughters.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to lay the substitute on the table,
so as to get at the original resolution and make it a resolution of
inquiry; but withdrew it at the request of

Mr. WEST, who desired to express his views. He said, that
the gentleman last up had alluded to what was correctly the con-
struction to be placed on the article in the constitution of the
United States. He said, that it could hardly be presumed that a
citizen of the State of Massachusetts should be entitled to the
privileges of our citizens. He believed that free negroes living
amongst our people was a great evil, and that the best way to
remedy that evil was, by a prohibitory clause in our constitution.

2i8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

to confine them to those free States where they could find a secure
and a more equal home. One of the primary influences which
induced the people of his county to settle in Illinois, was that they
might not only be relieved from the evil effects of slavery, but, also,
of a colored population. These negroes were, mostly, idle and
worthless persons, and his people were very anxious to get rid of
them. He had received a letter from one of his constituents this
morning, which said that several horses had been stolen, and that
to guard against these negroes, it was almost necessary to keep
a watch.

Allusion had been made to Massachusetts. He loved and
venerated that State, but there were principles contained in some
of her laws which he never could recognize. The gentlemen from
the north, who had spoken on this question, had come from coun-
ties which have but five, ten, or fifteen negroes; in our county
there were 500, and he would say that the evil was 500 times
greater. He hoped some provision would pass, so as to have this
matter settled and prevent scenes of violence. We had already
had such scenes — the scenes of 1 837 — and they were to be regretted,
and they must ever cast a shame upon our State. He had heard
it said in the Convention that in the canvass, the tree of public
sentiment had been shaken, and that the fruits had been gathered
in that hall; and when he looked around him he felt proud of his
State, on account of her representatives, and he must be permitted
to say, that he never before beheld such an august assembly.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean did not agree with the gentleman from
Madison. He could not believe that the evil existed to such an
alarming extent. He said that he was in favor of leaving the mat-
ter stand as it does in our present constitution, and was unwilling
to pass any provision which would endanger the adoption of
the constitution. He had no desire to engraft anything in that
constitution which would offend the people of any portion of the
State. He was satisfied that he was sent here to remedy certain
great evils in the government, and after having done so was not
disposed to have the work rendered useless or endanger its adop-
tion by this or any other such provision. He would leave the
matter for future legislation and public sentiment, to dispose of it
as the times should require. He was opposed to allowing people

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847 219

of color the right to vote, and he regretted that the gentleman from
Boone had said that people from other countries were to be put
upon a par with negroes. This was casting another fire-brand
into the Convention.

Mr. CHURCH said, he desired not to make a speech for the
purpose of making one, but merely to allude to some parts which
had not yet been touched upon. He asked if such a provision
were inserted, how could it be enforced? The laws they had
already were not sufficient to keep these people out. He would
like to hear some gentleman define this. He had been a little
amused, when this question came up yesterday, to hear the
gentleman from Sangamon say it was nothing but an abstract
principle. [He read from the constitution of the United States,
Mr. Logan explained.] The gentleman from Montgomery had
said there was a barrier between the two races — the blacks and
the whites — if there was, why attempt to raise it higher. If
nature had placed it there, leave it to nature, and not, by your
laws, make the difference wider. Put this provision in the consti-
tution and you exclude more whites from the State than you do
blacks. We are unable to extend the report of Mr. C.'s remarks
further. He advocated that the matter should be left to the action
of the Legislature, and deprecated the introduction of this provi-
sion into the constitution as unsafe, unjust, and impolitic. He
also asked, if the ordinance was in force, and Illinois a free State,
how was it that, at the last census, 380 slaves were returned?

Mr. LOGAN replied to the gentleman last up, and told the
gentlemen of the north that when they said that if this provision
was inserted in the constitution, that they would all vote against
it, they should remember that the north was only a part of the
State; that the State had two ends, and if the north voted against
the constitution because of this provision, the south had the same
right to say they would vote against it if it was not inserted. He
advocated for some time a midway policy of leaving the matter
to the Legislature. He was opposed to making this provision the
all absorbing topic that was to influence the people's votes upon
the adoption of the constitution. This would be the case in many
of the counties, if this provision was inserted.

Mr. BROCKMAN said, that he was sorry to hear gentlemen

220 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

throwing out threats that if such a provision was adopted that
they would defeat the whole constitution. The people of his
county were much concerned in this question, but they would not
reject the constitution upon this or any one subject. If we are
to cling to some favorite question, and if we do not succeed defeat
the whole, we had much better adjourn and go home. He had
been opposed to the reduction of the members of the Legislature,
because it affected his county, but if the Convention had reduced
the number down to 60, he would have submitted, and would have
voted for the constitution. The majority should govern, that
was the true democratic principle. He had never heard before
that negroes were citizens under the constitution of the United
States, and entitled to all the rights and immunities of citizens.
Would gentlemen like to see their posterity sitting in a legislative
assembly with a mixed delegation, as was the case in other places?
We must either admit these negroes as citizens or exclude them.
He would vote for the exclusion forever. On motion the Conven-
tion adjourned.

AFTERNOON

Mr. JENKINS said, it was perhaps necessary for him to
define his position. If the naked abstract question of the right
of one man to hold another in slavery were presented to him, he
would very probably answer no. But no such question was now
before them. He considered that the slaves were in a better
condition now than if they were in their own country. He
believed the negroes were a degraded race, and could not agree
with the gentleman from Adams, that the heroes of Cerro Gordo
could ever be reduced by servitude to any such degradation. He
conceived this could not be the case, and he would cite the Indian
race, which never could be reduced to slavery. The question of
slavery was the one which would, if at all, divide the Union, and
it must be discussed. — But he considered the question before them
as a political one — one of State policy only; and it was, whether,
in the present state of circumstances, we should introduce a pro-
vision into our constitution to exclude negroes from coming into
our State. It had been agreed that we should restrict the Legis-
lature in many things, so as they might not hereafter be disturbed;

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847 221

and he asked if there were any questions which would be more
difficult to settle by a Legislature than the present one, and if
there was a more proper time to settle it than the present? — If a
man votes for this resolution, he can hardly escape the charge of
being inhuman, and of a desire to render the negroes more degraded
than at present, but self preservation was the first law, and for the
purpose of peace and harmony, it was our duty to so fix the con-
stitution so that this matter should be forever settled. We had
only to look at our sister States, and see that this population had
led the people into tumult and violence, to know that it was our
duty to put a stop upon it. It might, for a while, be a punishment
upon them, but eventually result in their own good. It would
compel them to fix their residence in those States where they
belonged, and the people of those States might do something to
benefit their condition. Our friends at the north do not under-
stand our position at the south. They think us wrong, because
they cannot see the evils of this class of population among us.
They have in their counties but few negroes, whose interest and
policy it was to behave themselves. But we have them in large
numbers, whole settlements of them, who do nothing, idle away
their time, and are as trifling, worthless, filthy, and degraded as
in any part of the Union. It had been said that if we put this into
the constitution that the people of the north will go against
the constitution. Now, suppose we say that if they put into the
constitution a power to create banks, which our people are opposed
to, will they hesitate because it may endanger the adoption of the
constitution? They do not change their course, but insist upon
such a provision. If the provision contained in the resolution be
put into the constitution and thereby it is defeated, let it be so; it is
much better to have this question put at rest. It has been said
on all sides that there was no confidence to be put in the Legis-
lature. Why leave this question, then, with them, where it will
forever be open to agitation, and by the abolitionists, whose policy
was always to agitate.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall opposed the resolution in a few
words, and then addressed the Convention upon the benefits of
colonization.

222 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. MOFFETT offered an amendment, that if the resolution
passed it should be submitted to the people in a separate article.

Mr. BOND said, that it might appear strange that he differed
from the gentleman from Adams, (Mr. Williams) because people
had often said that in case that gentleman should drop off first, he
(Mr. B.) would be obliged to think for himself. He then replied,
at length, to the gentleman from Will, and reminded the Conven-
tion that his resolution was only applicable to those negroes who
may hereafter come into the State.

Messrs. Churchill, Kitchell and Knowlton, each, made
some remarks on the question; which we are unable to give for
want of room.

Mr. SINGLETON advocated, in a speech of some time, the
adoption of the resolution; and while we have a report of his
remarks, we regret that want of space precludes their insertion.

Mr. Geddes advocated the resolution, and Messrs. Deitz
Sharpe and Powers opposed it.

Mr. KITCHELL, who proceeded to address the Convention.
He desired to see such steps taken by the Legislature as would
arrest the increase of the negro population in this State; and he
was for leaving the subject to be disposed of by that body.

Mr. KNOWLTON addressed the Convention, in opposition
to the resolution. He was opposed to any alteration of the pres-
ent constitution in relation to this matter. He was opposed to
the introduction of any subject that would excite sectional feel-
ings, and he was extremely sorry to hear the terms north and south
so often reiterated in this debate. They were not assembled to
make a constitution for a particular latitude; they were not here
to consider the interests of one particular portion of the State to
the exclusion of another. For his own part, he was for pursuing
the course which, to his judgment, seemed the best calculated to
promote the interests of the whole State. He could say, as some
other gentlemen had done, that he had come here free and un-
trammeled upon this question, as well as almost every other; and
he should endeavor to act entirely free from prejudice and sec-
tional bias. He was for leaving the present constitution exactly
as it stood in relation to this matter.

FRIDAY, JUNE 23, 1847 223

Mr. SINGLETON said, that he had a proposition which he
desired to submit, and he would have submitted it, had he been
here, when the resolution now before the body was presented, and
before the pending amendments had been offered. As he was
not, he would not be able to present his proposition at this time;
but he desired, before the vote was taken, to make a few remarks
explanatory of the position which he occupied upon this subject,
and of the views which his constituents, and nearly all the inhab-
itants of that region of country in which he resided, entertained.

A great deal had been said ahout the effect which the incor-
poration of such a provision as that contained in the resolution
now under consideration, was to have upon the North and upon
the South. It seemed to him that gentlemen should not consider
the effect which the incorporation of a principle in the constitu-
tion was to have upon any particular portion of the State. The
only enquiry should be, was it a correct principle? Was it calcu-
lated to advance the interests — to preserve the peace and quietude
of the State? These were proper inquiries. But if there was to
be a system of log-rolling, if a principle was to be adopted because
it was desired by any one portion of the State as an offset for some
advantage to be granted to, or gained by another portion, then
he thought it would be better to adjourn and go home. No good
could be accomplished by acting upon such a system as that. He
would vote for what he considered to be right, no matter whether
his constituents coincided in opinion with him or not. If he be-
lieved that a principle was right, he would not stop to inquire
whether it was so considered by the people at large. If he was
convinced of its correctness it was all that was required to secure
his vote. His own feelings had always been upon the side of
slavery. He came from a slave State. He had lost none of his
sympathies for slave-holders and slaves. He had a deep sym-
pathy for slaves, for he knew that the conduct of those men in his
State and in others, who pretended to be endeavoring to better
the condition of slaves, instead of bettering their condition, was
involving them in deeper degradation. This question ought to
be met with an honest endeavor to preserve and promote as far
as possible the happiness of the unfortunate negro, and to set at
rest all those animosities which have heretofore disturbed the

224 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

country. There was no question which had disturbed, and which
would in future disturb and agitate this country so much as this
question of slavery. He feared it was to be the power which was
to break the cord which had bound us together as a nation. The
federal cords he feared were to be broken by it. This union,
unless a different course were to be pursued, would be dissolved,
and it would be by means of this very question. It would not
be so if we were to come up and meet the question as we ought.
We were told that we would build up an abolition party, here by
the adoption of such a resolution as the present. He cared not
though this should be the result. — Were we to be deterred from
the avowal of our principles, because by doing so we might array
a party against us? This was not a sound doctrine. It was right
that there should be some constitutional provision upon this sub-
ject. It should not be left to the uncertainty of future legislation.
We came here professing to have in view retrenchment. — This he
conceived would be a very important step towards that object;
for if the question were left open for the next ten years, one-quarter
of the time of the sessions of the legislature would be consumed
by legislating upon this very question. Petitions would come in,
asking for the abolishment of existing laws, and the subject would
be continually agitated.

The object of the resolution, as he understood it, was to pro-
vide some permanent rule by which both parties should be gov-
erned upon this subject. He was aware that a great number of
persons had come to Illinois for the purpose of getting rid of
slavery, not for the purpose of interfering with their neighbors,
and of breaking down the institution of slavery; but to avoid the
evils attending that institution, seeking repose, and endeavoring
to get rid of the annoyances to which they were subjected in a
slave State. Such men had a right — it was their duty to use
every means in their power to keep free negroes, as well as slaves
out of the State. Now, if we are to have, continued Mr. S., any
slavery, that is negro slavery (for God knows we have enough of
of every other kind), it is useless for gentlemen to talk about mak-
ing this a free State. The States have agreed among themselves
that no person who is bound to labor in one State, shall escape
into another and be protected in consequence of any law in force

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847 225

in that State to which he has escaped, and this has laid the foun-
dation for a constitutional provision. The United States upon
the adoption of a federal constitution, thought it best that a gen-
eral rule should be laid down upon this particular subject. It
was then expected that individual States would each carry out the
provision thus inserted in the constitution of the United States by
the enactment of State laws. But we see that it has not been
done. Pennsylvania at one time decided that the legislature had
no power to carry out the provisions, and Illinois decided that it
had. For myself, I believe that each of the States had the power,
and that we have the power to enforce it by legislation as well as
by constitutional provisions. But I prefer that it should be a
constitutional provision, in order to give it permanency, in order
to avoid that fluctuation to which the laws of Illinois are very sub-
ject. Now, are we to leave this subject open, and permit Illinois
to be a receptacle for all the worthless, superannuated negroes that
slave-holders may chance to send into the State? Sir, it is not
because that I dislike the negroes that I object to their coming
into the State. I feel a sympathy for them; but this is a matter
of self-defence. We are bound as a defensive measure to incor-
porate some provision of this sort into the constitution. We do
not know how soon the question may come up in the legislature,
in such a manner as will endanger the peace of the whole State.
We know that it is a most exciting question, and by whatever
method we can most effectually avoid its recurrence, it will be the
best policy for us to adopt that course; and nothing less will do,
it appears to me, than the insertion of a provision in the constitu-
tion, which will settle the question as long as the constitution
remains in force.

Now, it has been contended by those who are opposed to the
resolution, that we have no power to do it, because the constitu-
tion of the United States provides that the citizens of each State
shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities which are
enjoyed by the citizens of another State to which they may emi-
grate. Now, suppose a person acquired citizen-ship at the age of
seventeen in the State of New York, and should then come to this
State; would he be entitled to the rights and privileges of a citizen
here? No sir, he would be subject to the limitations and restric-

226 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

tions which are imposed by the laws of Illinois, in regard to citizen
ship. Well, have we not the same power to limit as to color that
we have in regard to age? Unquestionably.

It is a curious argument that has been used by some gentle-
men, that by excluding negroes we exclude white men. I do not
know how this is to operate, unless it apply to some particularly
attached friend of the negro, who may feel disposed to follow him.
If that be the case, then we should express it fully in the provisions
which we adopt. Now, if there are men in Illinois who prefer
the society of negroes, if there are men so extraordinarily anxious
'to associate with negroes, let them accompany their favorites to
some locality where their presence may not be objectionable.
But in this State, there are men who prefer the society of white
men, and who have come here to get rid of an intolerable nuisance.
Sir, I could with some patience listen to a proposition for the toler-
ation of the presence of the negroes in this State, if it came from
the negroes themselves, but when I have it coming from those who
are acting from motives of interest, who are contemplating profit
from the presence of negroes in the State, I have no patience.
The distinction which God has made between the races can never
be abolished. Sir, I do hope that the resolution will pass, and I
have here another which I intend to bring before this Convention
at the proper time.

Mr. Singleton here read the resolution which he had intended
to offer.

The objections which will be brought up against a proposition
of this sort are the very same as those which are urged against
the proposition now before the convention. That this convention
ought not to legislate upon the subject, for it is legislating. It is
high order of legislation, and those are very questions for this
body to legislate upon. Now, I ask is it not proper that we should
adopt some permanent provision on the subject? Is it not a
question of sufficient importance to demand the action of this
body? If not, then let the subject be disposed of at once. If it
is, let us say to those who are advocating the introduction of
negroes here, and for extending to them all the privileges to which
citizens are entitled, that we are not disposed to engage in any
thing of the sort either now or hereafter.

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1847 227

But it is said, it is better to postpone the consideration of this
subject. Now, I think every man's mind must be made up in
regard to it. What would you think of a man who would say to
you, I have a negro and you have a pretty daughter, I should like
a marriage contracted between them, I do not want you to decide
now, postpone your decision until some other time? Now, this is
what is proposed here. It is an indirect proposition that the
people of this State shall abolish all these distinctions which have
heretofore preserved and protected society for the benefit (I do
not know whether it is for the benefit, whether it is for the amel-
ioration) of the condition of the negro or degradation of the white
population. I did not intend when I arose to detain the conven-
tion so long as I have, but it is a subject on which I feel deeply,
and it is a question of more importance, I think, than it seems to
be considered by gentlemen who have been discussing it. I hope
at least that gentlemen will consider well, before they give their
votes, whether it is not better to adopt a permanent rule on the
subject, than to leave it open to future legislation.

Mr. GEDDES next addressed the Convention. He was desir-
ous that some prohibition against the introduction of a black
population into the State should be enacted, but he was appre-
hensive that the insertion of such a provision into the constitu-
tion would create much difficulty, and might endanger its final
adoption. If he were here in a legislative capacity, he would feel
himself called upon to sustain such a proposition as the one now
offered, but he thought it would be better that it should not be
made a constitutional provision. He felt deeply for the condition
of the unfortunate negro. He regarded slavery as a moral evil,
but he did not believe that it could be abolished in the United
States without creating ten-fold greater evil. The people of the
South he regarded as the best friends of the blacks, and the climate
of the Soutl- was best suited to them. He thought, therefore,
that there would be no hardship or inhumanity in prohibiting
them from entering this State; and he would be glad, therefore, to
see such a prohibition enacted by the Legislature.]-'

Mr. LEMON was in favor of a prohibitory clause against

"This insertion is taken from the Sangamo Journal, July 1.

228 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

negroes coming into the State for many reasons, which we have
it not in our power to furnish. In conclusion, he said, that he
did not believe they were altogether human beings. If any
gentleman thought they were, he would ask him to look at a
negro's foot! (Laughter.) What was his leg doing in the middle
of it? If that was not sufficient, let him go and examine their
nose; (roars of laughter) then look at their lips. Why, their
sculls [sic] were three inches thicker than white people's.

Mr. WEAD briefly opposed any provision in the constitution,
as the Legislature had full powers to legislate on the matter.

Mr. McCALLEN opposed leaving this matter for future
legislation, and advocated the adoption of the provision.

Mr. VANCE moved the previous question.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin moved to lay it on the table.

Mr. SINGLETON moved an adjournment. Lost. The yeas
and nays were taken on laying the subject on the table — and
resulted — yeas 80, nays 55.

Mr. LOGAN moved that Mrs. Brown and daughters have
the use of the Senate chamber on Saturday evening, for a concert.
Carried.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

XVII. SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Palmer.

Mr. SINGLETON presented the petition of H. G. Grimsley
and others, for a provision in the constitution to prevent the
emigration of negroes to, and the emancipation of, slaves in this
State. Referred to the committee on the Bill of rights.

[Mr. S. said: It would be a reflection upon the sagacity of the
House to attempt to conceal his object in presenting, at this time,
the petition that had just been read. The subject had been large-
ly discussed, and on yesterday laid upon the table of this house,
where gentlemen intend it shall remain. He was not content
with this discussion, or satisfied with the course taken upon the
subject of this petition, by honorable gentlemen on this floor.
He was determined not to be satisfied. It was a question of im-
portance to the people of Illinois, and so considered by his con-
stituents, and for them he should speak. He had, therefore,
availed himself of this method of reflecting the will of his constit-
uents, and of expressing his own deep feelings upon the subject.
If I had asked this house to reconsider their vote of yesterday,
upon the resolution of the honorable gentleman from Clinton, and
that reconsideration had, the proposition would not have been in
a shape most acceptable to its friends. In order, then, to present
this question to the convention in another and different shape,
and at the earliest moment allowed by its rules, the form of peti-
tion has presented itself as the only practicable mode.

My object, continued Mr. S., is not to abridge the privileges
of the unfortunate negro, except as incident to the assertion of a
principle and the correction of a most dangerous and diabolical
practice. I speak, sir, upon this floor for my constituents and for
myself, leaving to the superior ability of each friend of the prop-
osition, contained in the prayer of the petitioners, the expression
of their own views and the feelings of those they represent.

The petitioners have indicated in their prayer to this body.

230 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

their desire for such a permanent constitutional rule, upon the
subject of free negroes, as will of itself effectually prevent their
introduction amongst us, and at the same time prohibit the inter-
ference of our citizens with the negro property of our neighboring
States, and secure the States and territories of the United States
against any violation, by the inhabitants of this State, of those
rights which have their foundation in the constitution of the United
States, and acknowledged and respected by their laws.

But, Mr. President, it has been objected upon this floor, and
elsewhere, that this is not the proper subject of constitutional
law. And this objection, sir, comes from a quarter hitherto re-
spected. Shall I believe, sir, that gentlemen who urge this objec-
tion are sincere? Shall I be thus free to yield up this question —
my high opinion of their legal learning and sagacity? Or shall I
concede that it was made for the mere sport of the breeze, and
when the storm should rage, new counsel would be heard? Sir,
I cannot consent to be guilty of such gross injustice to those gen-
tlemen as would result from an acknowledgment of their sincer-
ity. Do gentlemen who support this objection see that if it
prevails, that they have contributed to the attainment of a most
important and desirable object by the abolitionists — that it
lays the foundation, is the basis, the very platform of all their
future operations — that without this foundation no substantial
fabric can be erected by them in this State — but upon such a
foundation they would erect a superstructure that would last
until the hour of a bloody revolution?

But at this point I am met by the arguments of gentlemen on
the other side, "that the legislature will have ample power to
correct this evil." Sir, I ask the gentlemen in reply, whether
this is not a subject worthy of a permanent rule, and that it ought
not to be subject to the changes that characterize the legislation
of Illinois? And I ask gentlemen, whether the legislature, influ-
enced by the example of this convention, would not rid themselves
of the responsibility by postponing the subject to a succeed-
ing legislature, and so on, until the evil shall have subdued our
strength, and conquered all our hopes? If this matter is left open
for the action of the legislature, away with all hopes of domestic
happiness in Illinois. If this subject, of such high importance to

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 231

the social condition of Illinois, is not worthy of a place in our con-
stitution, then had we better return to our constituents, never
again to ask the honor of their trust and confidence.

Gentlemen have said, that the principles asserted by the reso-
lutions were correct, but could not be enforced without legisla-
tive enactments. Sir, the friends of this measure desire for many
reasons to take the matter out of the hands of the legislature en-
tirely. Hence, the resolution provides that "the constitution
shall of itself contain sufficient power to correct the evils com-
plained of." As a matter of retrenchment, a constitutional provision
would be eminently useful to bring the expenses of the legislature
within proper limits. All these exciting and time-absorbing
questions should be excluded from its jurisdiction. If the question
should be left to the legislature, it would become the subject of
barter and exchange in adjusting the various interests of the State.
Gentlemen representing counties where the evil did not exist,
would readily exchange their votes for or against the black laws,
as they are called, for the purpose of securing some favorite meas-
ure of his [sic] constituents. It would at once hoist the flood-gates
of corruption, and from the fountain of power would our country
be overwhelmed.

But two other objections have been urged to the proposed
provision, and with much energy upon the part of their respective
friends. The honorable gentleman from Sangamon objects, be-
cause in his opinion, it would endanger the adoption of the
amended constitution. The gentleman from Boone objects, because
in his opinion, the North would reject the constitution, and for
the additional high and weighty consideration, that we should be
contravening the constitution of the United States. Sir, the con-
stitution of the United States has laid the foundation for this pro-
vision; the States conceived it necessary in justice to each other,
for their mutual peace and good will, and for the perpetuation of
national harmony, that it should be so laid. The second section
of the fourth article of the constitution of the United States, is
intended to operate upon those only who are held to service or
labor in any State or territory within the limits and under the
jurisdiction of the United States, and who may escape from such
service or labor into this or any other State or territory within the

232 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

prescribed limits. The States owe it to each other, that this pro-
vision should be strictly enforced, by the adoption of such per-
manent and constitutional provisions as will effectually prevent
the interference of the inhabitants of each, with the negro property
of the other. But, Mr. President, this is not the constitutional
provision by which the honorable gentleman from Boone (Mr.
Hurlbut), seeks to establish the want of power in this Convention
to enforce the proposition before it on yesterday; that provision
is in these words: "The citizens of each State shall be entitled
to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several
States." The gentleman supposes that all distinctions of color
are, or may become unconstitutional, — that if a negro, who by the
laws of New York is a citizen, and may exercise the right of suff-
rage, should emigrate to this State, he would in consequence of the
laws of New York, and his emigration to the State, be entitled to
all the privileges and immunities of free white citizens of Illinois.
Sir, this doctrine is too absurd to excite the least alarm. I
apprehend that the gentleman would not insist that a boy of the
State of New York, who was by the laws of that State entitled to
vote, would upon his arrival here, in consequence of the New York
laws, be taken out of the limitations and provisions of our own
laws concerning minors? Has New York the right to fix an age
of majority for us, and the qualifications of our electors? — Have
we not full power to limit the rights of suffrage to those who have
resided twelve months in this State? And have we not, sir, a
perfect and indefeasible right to limit it to free white men over the
age of twenty-one years? The objections of the honorable gen-
tleman from Sangamon (Mr. Logan), do not apply to the proposi-
tion now before this Convention, nor sir, did they well apply to
the proposition which was laid upon your table on yesterday.
Sir, we have no desire to encumber the various amendments that
will be submitted to the people: — or rather, sir, we wish this prop-
osition not to be encumbered or endangered by any other amend-
ment, and therefore the proposition now before the house is, that
it shall be submitted as a distinct and separate amendment. Its
friends rely upon its own intrinsic merit, and upon the high sense
of popular honor and popular justice. But, sir, suppose it was
not proposed to submit this to the people as a distinct and sepa-

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 ^27,

rate provision — as was the case with the proposition of my honor-
able friend from Clinton, are we Sir, to be deterred from doing our
duty here, because the gentleman objects that the North will
reject the constitution? Has Illinois no other point but the North?
Is there no South, no East, no West to the State? Have these
points no power, no votes to give, for or against, the constitution?
Is the voice of the North to prevail upon this floor to the exclusion
of every other interest? Then, sir, let the south, the east and the
west unite their feeble voices for their mutual security. If it is
the determination of northern men to draw a line of distinction
between the north and the south, — if the north is resolved upon a
mixed society of free blacks and white population, with equal
privileges, then, sir, let the line be formed that my constituents
and myself may seek repose upon its southern side.

What, Mr. President, are we to think if gentlemen are truly
representing the north upon this subject? How monstrous the
declaration they have made! How threatening to the peace and
all the sacred virtues of the State! Have gentlemen who would
claim for New York negroes, or the negroes of any other country,
the privileges of free white citizens of Illinois, sir, inquired into
the extent of these privileges? If they have not, sir, let them
divide the sovereign power of this State into as many parts as
there are free white male citizens over the age of twenty-one years,
and each part will be found to contain the privileges of a citizen,
they will be astonished at the extent of privileges they claim for
that degraded race. Sir, the fairest daughter in the land is not
beyond their reach; the highest pinnacle of power and station, is
accessible to their ambition; all the refinements of society are
crushed and swallowed up in their progress, till not a virtue is left
to mark our once exalted and dignified race. There are, sir, upon
this floor undisguised abolitionists, who have in this hall voted
directly upon the subject of abolishing the distinction of color.
Sir, I admire the manly independence of those gentlemen, the
color of their flag is not concealed, whilst I hate and despise their
principles; but, sir I cannot express the slightest approbation of
the conduct of gentlemen, who from various motives have voted
with the abolitionists in securing a most important advantage to
them and alike dangerous to us. If gentlemen have been actu-

234 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ated by their regard for northern men, and what are here repre-
sented as northern principles, then let us have an open avowal, —
throw off the flimsy cover of specious theory, and frankly acknowl-
edge their degeneracy, that southern opinion, and southern prin-
ciples may see and know by what they are opposed.

I cannot, sir, from my knowledge of northern gentlemen and
ladies, believe that they are truly represented in all things upon
this floor. Among them are many I feel proud to call friends, and
to whom the idea of being reduced to the society of negroes would
be most frightfully revolting. But, sir. If I did believe it, my
course here would not be changed. I have made the proper in-
quiry of my conscience, and my constituents; they answer that I
am right. They are not willing that a handful of abolitionists
should trample over the great body of the people of this State,
because they threaten to vote against the adoption of the con-
stitution. Gentlemen should not be deterred by such threats from
giving their support to correct principles, irrespective of men or
places.

The effect of a principle upon a given portion of the State
ought not to be considered. Enquire and learn the general ten-
dency, effect and correctness of a principle, and apply it alike to
all. But, sir, let me say, if local prejudices are to smother great
and permanent principles, that I will pledge my constituents and
myself against any constitution that may come from the hands of
abolitionists without the desired prohibition. If gentlemen per-
sist in arguing that it is not the duty of this Convention to act
upon the question, then, sir, am I willing to meet them upon half-
way ground, and strike out from the constitution everything
which relates to slavery and involuntary servitude, if nothing but
the society of negroes will suit gentlemen. Then, sir, leave every
citizen of the State at liberty to introduce slaves if he pleases, and
those who do not like the relation of master and servant will have
an opportunity of indulging their taste.

The honorable gentleman from Winnebago added one other to
the objections already noticed, that if this provision is adopted, it
will drive many of our best citizens from the States. Truly, Mr.
President, a most deplorable event that we shall lose that portion
of our population who prefer the society of negroes to that of their

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 235

own race and condition! Sir, if there are such men in this State
as the honorable gentleman speaks of, they can now have my leave
of absence. Is the time of this Convention to be employed in
attempting to reconcile men of this kind? Sir, the world is large
enough for us all, and I have no desire to impose any restraint
upon the taste of any men, if they are anxious to become the
associates of negroes, or if they desire to establish any other rela-
tion between themselves and the negroes. I hope they may be
indulged, but not at the expense of those who have no such taste
or ambition.

When a petition was presented a few days since, praying among
other things, that this Convention should abolish all distinction
between the white man and negro, I moved to lay the petition on
the table until December a year, because sir, it was an insult to
this body, who were asked by the petitioners to degrade them-
selves; abolish all distinction between ourselves and the worthless
herd of innumerable wretches that would flock to our State; but,
sir, that petition was referred. For what, sir? For mere formal
respect to the petitioners! Gentlemen thought and declared that
it was right it should be considered. I will again refer to the case
I supposed on yesterday — that there are two men living in the
same neighborhood, one has a beautiful and interesting daughter,
the other, had a well bred negro man in his employment; the latter
proposes to his neighbor, sir, I wish you to receive my negro man
into your family as a gentleman; extend to him the society of your
daughter, and encourage their marriage together. Now, sir, I
ask, could such a request be listened to by any man of ordinary
self-respect with any degree of patience? Would he indulge the
audacity of his unprincipled neighbor by delaying his answer?
No, sir! Time is not necessary for the consideration of subject,
and the answer, no, with a corresponding action, would put the
contaminating wretch to flight. All such petitions contain in
substance the same request, and ought to be as summarily dis-
posed of. Members' minds were made upon this subject and they
were ready to decide, but out of show of respect the petition must
be referred. I have no respect, sir, for such petitions, or those
who sign them, nor would I have them believe from this deceptive
policy of referring that I had; and I am grateful to know that my

236 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

name stands among the independent spirits of this body who
voted against its reference.

Allow me Mr. President, to return for a moment to that ob-
jection which seems most popular and plausible with gentlemen
who have opposed our views on this discussion. It has been
reiterated upon this floor, that this subject more properly be-
longed to the legislature. If it does, then let me ask if this body
does not constitute the supreme legislative or law-making power
of this State? It is the highest legislative power known to civil
society, for whose good government and laws have been insti-
tuted— an object worthy of our action and patient deliberation—
upon the organization of society governments were erected for
their security and protection, and as society lies at the foundation
of government, all laws, either supreme or subordinate, should be
framed with reference to its preservation and protection. It is
our duty to see that it is not crushed and destroyed by the blight-
ing curse of neglect. Society has given birth to power, and in the
exercise of that power, its claims should first command our atten-
tion, and be the last to be postponed. Whilst the time and
attention of the Convention is employed in arranging the length,
breadth and power of office, and officers, the mere details of gov-
ernment is a great and paramount principle, to be overlooked, the
influence of which is felt everywhere, extending itself to the family
altar and the peaceful fireside. Sir, I cannot be content with such
neglect of such a principle.

I now come, Mr. President, to consider the effect of leaving
this question open, having already adverted to the effect of such
a course upon the legislature, and the possibility of a further
postponement by that body. I will consider briefly, its
influence upon the question of equality as presented by abolition-
ists, and its moral effect upon the community at large.

Illinois has already been the theatre of outrages which brand
her with almost indelible disgrace. The rights of neighboring
States have been openly disregarded, the property of our neigh-
bors forcibly taken, and forcibly withheld. Our own halls of
justice have been invaded to inflict this violence, and now, sir, the
public peace and tranquility, public and private justice, a due re-
gard for the compact between the States, our self-respect, our

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 237

peace at home and our character abroad, all unite in demanding
a remedy. If this question is postponed, an important point is
gained by the abolitionist, without which they could not succeed
with their iniquitous schemes; hence they are emboldened by this
temporary triumph, they see their influence is felt and acknowl-
edged, they will come out from their hiding places, and that which
has been done under cover of night will be openly transacted.
The negroes, sir, will be emboldened, and the public highways will
scarcely afford them room to pass, such will be the rapid increase
of their numbers and consequence.

The States that surround us have taken measures to rid them-
selves of this nuisance whilst Illinois, with open arms, invites them
to her embrace. It is substantially an invitation to the super-
annuated and worthless free negroes of the south to come within
our borders; it gives them assurance of present liberty, and future
equality. It is in effect, a license to those who wish to engage in
the lucrative business of negro-stealing from our sister States. It
furnishes such men with facilities that could not be otherwise
supplied, free negroes, thus introduced, become the agents and
willing instruments of designing abolitionists; their depots will
be erected upon each line of "underground railway," under the
superintendence of some bold and enterprising free negro; and
Illinois become the receptacle of this worthless and refuse popu-
lation of all the States. — And we shall not find good citizens from
abroad coming here, sir, to seek their society; but, on the contrary,
those good citizens of Illinois, not lost to all the finer feelings of
their nature, will seek another home. That equality here boldly
proposed, will gradually but imperceptibly fix itself upon the
institutions of the State. A Nat Turner will spring up to conduct
a war of extermination against the whites.

If, sir, in the slave States an attempt to exterminate the whites
should have been made, is it beyond the limits of probability, that
in Illinois,'where all legislation tends to encourage it, that it would
also be attempted? The scenes of South Hampton in Virginia,
will be re-enacted in Illinois; and the blood of our citizens be the
alarming sacrifice. A minority of this body have demanded a
remedy, without it their voice can never be still; though small in
number, I am proud to be one of them; our position now is that

238 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of sentinels upon the outer walls of the ramparts of social liberty,
and our exertions will ever be to awaken Illinois to a sense of her
danger. History presents to us an example that gives us hope;
the example of our revolutionary fathers forbids us despair.

The patriotism of our glorious revolution first found in the
hearts of a few, resisting the waves of British vengeance that
lashed our shores, strikingly illustrates the power of the ifff, when
coupled with unconquerable determination; but, sir, there is still
another and broader foundation for our hopes, to be found in the
more calm and deliberate consideration of this subject, by honor-
able members of this convention; when they look at the tendency
of this great question to break the cords that bind us together as
a nation; when they consider the inevitable tendency of their
decision, they cannot consent to return to their constituents with-
out repairing the insult and the wrong they have done them.

The effect of this question may be seen in the condition of our
federal Union. The strength of our government has so far been
equal to every internal division; but, sir, it owes its success to the
concentrated power of a united people. The odious doctrine of
abolition will "divide and conquer," and too much reliance on
the strength of our government exposes us to a weaker power;
broad, deep and firm as this government may be in its foundation,
bold and commanding in its superstructure, it is not beyond the
reach of such odious steps as have been allowed to abolitionists
upon this floor. And when the time comes, sir, who will sympa-
thize with Illinois, when the hideous shouts of exultation rise from
a \^ictorious negro population in Illinois? What sound but the
death shrieks of liberty? Shall we hear it?]^^

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, asked to be excused from
any longer serving on the committee on Education. He assured
the Convention, that in making this request, he was not influenced
by any change of feelings or abatement of zeal, in regard to the
great cause of education. Whatever situation he might occupy,
his best eff'orts should continue to be directed to the advancement

2* This speech by Singleton is taken from the Sangamo Journal, ]\Ay 8.

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 239

of that cause, upon which depends in an eminent degree the moral,
religious and political prosperity of the people.

Mr. GREGG said, that the course of the gentleman from
Jo Daviess (Mr. Campbell) was not unexpected to him (Mr. G.)
after what had occurred the other day during the absence of that
gentleman. I hope, however, said Mr.G., that what has occurred
will not cause him to withdraw from the committee where his
experience may be so serviceable to the Convention and the State.

[In order to make the report intelligible, the reporter would
here state, that Mr. Campbell is chairman of the committee on
Education, and for the purpose of obtaining information and
statistics, relating to the questions which had arisen and were
likely to arise in the committee and the Convention, he went to
Jacksonville on Wednesday last, after having apprised the com-
mittee of the object of his visit. On the following morning,
Mr. Edwards of Madison, from the committee on Education,
introduced a resolution, that that committee be requested to
consider and report provisions for the security of the school fund;
for a system of common schools, calculated to furnish Education
to every child in the State; and also for the appointment of a
superintendent. After submitting the resolution, Mr. Edwards
made a long speech upon it, which, after it was concluded, the
chair ruled out of order, on account of a resolution then on the
table, which was entitled to precedence. Further action upon
Mr. E's. resolution was then postponed till the resolution entitled
to precedence was disposed of; when that of Mr. E. again came
up, Mr. Gregg moved to postpone it until Saturday, when Mr.
Campbell would be present. Messrs. Edwards of Madison,
Churchill and Servant, also advocated its postponement.
Messrs. Williams, Evey, Davis of Montgomery, Pinckney and
Knowlton opposed it, and, after being amended, the resolution
was adopted.]

Mr. EDWARDS, of Madison said, for one, Mr. President, I
exceedingly regret that circumstances have occur[r]ed to produce
an unfavorable impression upon the mind of the honorable member
fromfjo Daviess (Mr. Campbell) in relation to what transpired
during his absence. There is no gentleman in this State for whom
I entertain a more profound respect, than the gentleman who

240 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

stands at the head of the committee on Education, and I assure
him and his friends, that the part I bore in the action of the
committee which was had during his absence, was not prompted
by the least disrespect to him, but a desire to settle certain pre-
liminaries and to pave the way to the consideration and investiga-
tion of questions which it was expected would come before the
committee. I sincerely thought that the presentation of the
resolution and the reference of the subjects included in it to the com-
mittee, would be approved by the honorable chairman of that
committee. It was agreed by the committee, that no final action
should be had upon those subjects, until after the return of the
chairman, in order that he might participate in the deliberations
which might be had.

So far as I was concerned, Mr. President, I had but one desire,
that of settling preliminaries necessary to enable the committee
to enter upon the duties appropriately belonging to them. I was
but an humble pioneer in the important matters involved in the
resolution, and it was not my purpose to act upon them, in the
absence of the chairman, whose experience and information were
indispensible to an efficient performance of the duties assigned
to the committee. I was too deeply impressed with a sense of
that gentleman's capacity, to attempt to act without the aid of
his abilities. The high estimation in which he is held by the
people, and his past services in the cause of education, entitle his
opinions and suggestions, on all questions before that committee,
to more than ordinary consideration.

In conclusion, Mr. President, I will repeat, that the imputation
that the committee acted in any manner inconsistent with a
sentiment of the highest respect for the honorable chairman, is
undeserved, and I hope that he will be induced to remain on the
committee where his services are so much required.

Mr. DEMENT said, that the course of the member from
Jo Daviess (Mr. Campbell) was not unexpected by him (Mr. D.).
I have, said Mr. D., heard the explanation of the honorable
gentleman from Madison (Mr. Edwards) with much pleasure,
and I should regret to have the member from Jo Daviess persist
in his application to be excused from serving on the committee.
I hope that he will reconsider his application, and not withdraw

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 241

from a station which he is so eminently qualified to fill, with honor
to himself and advantage to the State. I hope that he will be
satisfied with the explanation of the member from Madison.

I think that the difficulty has arisen in consequence of a desire
on the part of the committee to act seasonably upon the matters
before them; but I think, inasmuch as the chairman was absent
for a day or two, for the purpose of collecting data and information
to aid the committee in their investigations, that they ought to
have awaited his return. I did think that there was ground for
disagreeable feelings until I heard the explanation of the gentle-
man from Madison.

It is well known to the Convention that the subject of educa-
tion is one in which the member from Jo Daviess takes the deepest
interest. He was the first to present the propositions embraced
in the resolution, and he has distinguished himself for the zeal he
has manifested in an improvement of the school system. These
facts are well known, and will account for his desire to participate
in the action of the committee upon subjects that may be referred
to them.

I am satisfied that there are no bad feelings on the part of the
committee towards him, and I hope that he and his friends, of
whom I am proud to be one, will be satisfied with the explanation
that has been made.

Mr. CHURCHILL said, that he supposed, when the resolution
was introduced, that the committee was doing what the chairman
would approve of. — He was, at the time, opposed to any final
action upon the matters embraced in the resolution, but he did
not then object to their being referred to the committee.

Mr. PINCKNEY said, he hoped that the gentleman would
remain on the committee. He (Mr. P.) did not know, when the
gentleman was absent, that he was engaged in the business of the
committee.

Mr. CAMPBELL said, that he had apprised the committee of
his intended visit to Jacksonville, and the object of it.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, that if the gentleman from Jo Daviess
had been present when the resolution was offered he would not
have taken exceptions to what took place on that occasion. The
resolution was merely one of inquiry, not intended to be acted

242 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

upon by the Convention at that time; and when the gentleman
from Cook (Mr. Gregg) proposed to postpone the debate till the
chairman of the committee should have returned, no member on
the floor was more warmly in favor of a postponement than the
honorable member from Madison (Mr. Edwards). He thought
that his friend from Jo Daviess was under a false impression in
relation to the treatment he had received at the hands of the
committee, and he desired that he would withdraw his application
for a discharge, and consent to continue to serve as chairman.

Mr. SHIELDS said, that he was persuaded that the committee
intended no disrespect to the gentleman from Jo Daviess. He
had told the gentleman from Ogle (Mr. Pinckney) that the
chairman of the committee was absent, and that he (Mr. S.)
thought it proper to defer action until his return.

Mr. PRATT. As a friend and colleague of the member from
Jo Daviess, it may not be regarded as improper in me, to express
my views in relation to the subject which has given rise to this
debate. In doing so, sir, I will not say that I am prepared to urge
him to persist in his request to be discharged from the committee,
after what has been said; but I will say, that I approved of his
application, because I deemed it the only step he could take to
maintain his own dignity and that of his constituents. It is
known to this body, that my colleague had been absent from the
people he now represents, for a period of four years, and that he
returned to them only a few days before his election. He had
been, during the period of his absence, serving the people in the
capacity of Secretary of State, to his own detriment, so far as
pecuniary matters are concerned, and it was his purpose, when
he returned to Galena, to engage in the practice of his profession
and repair the pecuniary loss he had sustained by accepting office.
Independently of the ardent friendship entertained for him by the
people of Jo Daviess, he had other pretensions to a seat in this
body, among which were the services he had rendered in behalf
of education. These, together with his great personal popularity,
led his constituents to urge him to return to Springfield as a
delegate to this Convention. He consented to make the sacrifice,
and it is but natural that a desire should be felt to sustain the high
estimation in which he is held by his constituents. In this, how-

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 243

ever, he is doomed to disappointment, if the newspaper report of
the proceedings of Wednesday last, is to go abroad without expla-
nation. In these reports there is no explanation of the cause of
his absence from his seat. — [Mr. P. here read the reports of the
Journal and Register newspapers, which did not state that Mr.
Campbell was absent on the business of the committee.] His
constituents (continued Mr. P.) might infer from this report, that
he was absent from his post at the very moment when his services,
as chairman of the committee on Education, were required; and
this circumstance, unexplained, might go far to prejudice him in
the confidence of those whom it is his highest aim to faithfully
represent. This, together with a refusal by the Convention to
postpone action on the resolutions offered by Mr. Edwards, until
the chairman of the committee could be heard, would in the absence
of explanation be a poor compliment to that gentleman, and in
addition, would furnish to his enemies, abroad from here, quite
too ready a weapon, which they might wield to his injury. These
things were well calculated to mortify his feelings.

It is due to the honorable gentleman from Madison to say that,
at the time the motion to postpone was made by the gentleman
from Cook, it was seconded by him and urged in an appropriate
manner; but I must say, sir, in this connection, that the gentleman
from Ogle did not, in my judgment, act in this matter with that
delicacy and courtesy which some years' acquaintance with his
good name and reputation had taught me to expect from him.
When my colleague, the chairman of the committee on Education,
notified the committee of his intended absence, it was but courteous
to postpone any action in the Convention on subjects previously
brought by him before that committee, until his return; yet the
gentleman from Ogle, when the gentleman from Cook proposed to
postpone the resolution, opposed the postponement. If wrong in
this, the gentleman can now correct me. The course of gentlemen,
who opposed the suggested postponement, together with the final
action of the Convention upon the subject, I cannot, if I would,
deny was a source of mortification to me, and especially so when
I recollected that when the report of the committee on the
Executive Department was printed and laid on our tables, the
consideration of the report was unanimously postponed on account

244 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of the absence of the honorable chairman, who was away at the
same time and for the same purposes as my colleague.

When I said, sir, that I regarded my colleague's withdrawal
from the committee as an act due to himself and his constituents,
I did not mean to be understood as advising him not to re-consider
his application for a discharge. My desire was that he might be
placed in a proper light before the country, and it is a matter
within his own discretion, whether he shall, after what has been
said, deem it proper to yield to the general wish of the Convention
and consent to remain on the committee.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, I do not recollect that the member
from Ogle urged an unqualified discussion of the question on
Wednesday last. I understood that he desired, if discussion was
to be had, that the honorable chairman should be present. I
think that the member from Jo Daviess (Mr. Pratt) does not
recollect the precise position taken by the member from Ogle.

Mr. SCATES. I think that the honorable chairman's course
is right. It was proper for him to call the matter up in some form,
and place himself right before his constituents. I am satisfied,
from what has been said, that no disrespect towards him was in-
tended, and I sincerely hope that he will now be satisfied and
consent to remain on the committee.

Mr. SERVANT said, that as he had partaken in the debate at
the time the committee had reported the resolution, he thought it
would not be wrong in him to say a few words upon the matter
before the Convention. He thought the matter was not viewed
in a proper light. He never imagined that the least disrespect
was intended by the committee, nor shown by any member of the
Convention, towards the honorable gentleman from Jo Daviess,
whose services and labors in the cause of education were so highly
valued and esteemed. He hoped that gentleman would withdraw
his request and that he would continue to afford the committee
the benefit of his great talents and information. He thought the
cause given for the request was without foundation, and he trusted
the gentleman would be satisfied with the manifest opinion in which
the house concurred that no disrespect was intended.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac hoped the gentleman from Jo Daviess
would yield to what appeared the almost unanimous request of

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 245

the house, and withdraw his request to be excused, particularly
when it was manifest that every member desired him to retain his
post upon the committee, and known that his great abilities were
required upon the committee. The committee of which the
gentleman was chairman was one of the most important character,
and of the greatest interest to the State, and he repeated his hope
that that gentleman would retain his position and withdraw his
request.

Mr. ALLEN joined in the request that the gentleman from
Jo Daviess would withdraw his motion to be excused. Although
he was much surprised at the time the resolution was reported,
while the chairman of the committee was absent, and also surprised
that it was not postponed till his return; he was satisfied, how-
ever, that no disrespect was intended by the action of the members of
the committee, or of the Convention. He believed that sufficient
had been said by every member of the committee to satisfy
that gentleman that no disrespect was intended, and to induce him
to remain on the committee. It was the desire of the country that
he should do so; the gentleman's talents, and the much thought
which he had given to the subject of education, had led the people
to expect much from him. His able report on this question, and
in relation to the appointment of a superintendent of public
instruction, had awakened much interest, and had directed public
attention to him as one pre-eminently qualified to be at the
head of a committee on that subject. He hoped the gentleman
from Jo Daviess would withdraw his request to.be excused.

Mr. LOUDON said, that he entertained the highest respect
for the gentleman from Jo Daviess, and he earnestly hoped that
the request to be excused would be withdrawn. If the committee,
however, had thoughtlessly reported in the absence of the chair-
man, he knew that none of the committee intended the least dis-
respect, to mar his feelings or injure his honor. The gentleman
from Jo Daviess had a standing high in the estimation of the
Convention and of the country, and he hoped their unanimous
desire would induce the gentleman to continue in his post, as
chairman of the committee.

Mr. LOGAN repeated what he deemed the universal desire of
the Convention, that the gentleman from Jo Daviess would con-

246 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

tinue on the committee, and withdraw his request. He felt sure,
from what had been said, that the gentleman from Jo Daviess
must feel now that no disrespect was intended by the gentleman
from Madison, or the other members of the committee, in what
had taken place in relation to the report.

Mr. HARDING said, he was a member of the committee on
Education, and was confident that the course of the committee
had not been dictated by any feelings of disrespect towards the
chairman. The committee had held two meetings; at the first,
the chairman was present and presided. They met again last
Tuesday, the chairman was not present, the members came with
several propositions, none of which were offered or acted on
because of the absence of the chairman. It was, however, agreed
that a resolution should be offered, as it was understood that no
question should be inquired into without first having the matter
come from the Convention. He had voted for that resolution,
although he was opposed to the principles contained in it. In all
this, no one, so far as he knew, intended the least disrespect towards
the chairman.

Mr. ARCHER hoped that the gentleman from Jo Daviess
would, after the explanations that had been given, and the dis-
claimers of all disrespect, withdraw his application to be
excused from serving on the committee. The cause of education
was one in which the people of the whole State felt the greatest
interest, and one on which they looked to this Convention to
bestow great deliberation; and as the talent and abilities of the
gentleman from Jo Daviess had been, heretofore, somewhat
directed to this subject, the people of the State looked to him for
much of the care and benefit to be secured by this favorite question.
He hoped, sincerely, that the request would be withdrawn.

Mr. SHUMWAY said, he was a member of the committee,
but was not present at the meeting when this resolution was
directed to be reported.

Mr. KNOWLTON said, that it was, perhaps, proper in him,
as he had taken part in this matter when the committee reported
the resolution, to say that his course and his remarks were not, in
the slightest degree, intended to be disrespectful to the distin-
guished chairman of the committee — the gentleman from Jo

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 HI

Daviess. Nor did he think that any was intended or shown by
the action or language used on that occasion by the gentleman from
Madison. He hoped the request would be withdrawn.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that it was a matter of
extreme regret to him that so much of the time of the Convention
had been occupied by this subject. He did not expect this when
the request was made. It was true that he was absent when the
committee met, he had gone to Jacksonville. He had not gone
there to attend to business of his own alone; not for his own amuse-
ment, but to get certain documents, which could not be had here,
in reference to the very subject before the committee. When he
returned he heard of what had taken place, and from the reports
of the proceedings published in the papers, and the effect which he
knew they would have on his constituents, he felt that they were
as much calculated to injure his character, as they were deeply
poignant to his feelings. Without being advised to do so by any
of his friends, and without consultation with them on the subject,
he, of his own accord, determined to withdraw from the committee.
Accordingly, he made the request, but now, from what had taken
place, he concluded to withdraw that request.

Mr. EDWARDS, of Madison, approved of the highly honorable
course of the gentleman from Jo Daviess, and feeling what was due
to his own character, he asked to be excused from serving on the
committee.

Mr. DEMENT said, that he hoped the same reasons that had
induced the gentleman from Jo Daviess to withdraw his applica-
tion to be excused from serving on the committee on Education,
would also induce the gentleman from Madison to do the same.
I know not, said he, who the other gentlemen are that compose
that committee, but I do know that there are none in the State
whom I would rather see on that committee than those two gentle-
men. I know not what the gentleman from Madison may have
thought required him to make this request, but I hope that he will
continue to serve, so that the Convention and the State might
have the united talents of the two gentlemen.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, that while he approved of the honor-
able course of the gentleman from Jo Daviess, he would hope the
gentleman from Madison would not withdraw his application.

248 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

He was the friend of both parties, still he thought that, after what
had fallen in the remarks of gentlemen, that his friend from
Madison ought not to continue on the committee.

Mr. CHURCHILL agreed with the gentleman last up, and
considered that the conduct of the committee had been unjustly
alluded to, and he would not continue to serve; he, therefore, asked
to be excused from that committee.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery was of opinion that the gentle-
man from Madison should not withdraw his application.

Mr. SCATES, not being much versed in matters of etiquette,
could not see, from what had transpired, any necessity for the
request of the gentleman from Madison. He was sure that no one
had intimated that that gentleman had acted in any way the least
unworthy of his distinguished reputation.

Mr. WHITNEY, after speaking in the highest terms of both
gentlemen, and in approval of their conduct, said that, while
he anxiously desired that the gentleman from Madison would with-
draw his application, he would vote for excusing him if he persisted
that his withdrawal was necessary.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac sincerely hoped that the gentleman
from Madison would adopt the same course pursued by the
gentleman from Jo Daviess and withdraw his application. Neither
the gentleman from Jo Daviess nor any of his friends desired to
injure the feelings or the honor of the gentleman from Madison,
and he hoped he would continue on the committee.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison said I respect the course of the
honorable gentleman from Jo Daviess, and I wish not to be under-
stood as entertaining the least feeling of disapprobation of the
course of the gentleman or any of his friends on this floor.
But I hope they, and the Convention, will respect my feelings, for
I cannot act on that committee and rest under the imputation
that must, from this discussion, be placed upon my actions.

Mr. LOGAN explained that when he had requested the gentle-
man from Jo Daviess to withdraw his application, that he in no
wise admitted that the conduct of the gentleman from Madison,
or the committee, had been wrong. He appealed to the gentleman
from Madison to withdraw his application. He (Mr. L.) could
not be shoved off any committee by what anybody said.

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1847 249

Mr. KNOWLTON was extremely gratified when the gentleman
from Jo Daviess had withdrawn his request to be excused, because
he was satisfied that no disrespect to him had been intended. He
would not, however, desire the gentleman from Madison to with-
draw his application.

Mr. HAYES said, that he was one of those friends of the gentle-
man from Jo Daviess who had requested that gentleman to
withdraw his request, and he did not wish to be understood as
having in any way thrown any imputation upon the honorable
gentleman from Madison. He offered the following resolution,
and asked its unanimous adoption.

Resolved, That it is the unanimous desire of this Convention
that the Hon. Cyrus Edwards shall retain his position as a member
of the committee on Education.

Messrs. Pinckney, Archer and Brockman hoped the appli-
cation made by the gentleman from Madison would be withdrawn.

Mr. CONSTABLE repeated his opinion that the gentleman
from Madison should not withdraw his request.

Mr. DEMENT made some remarks in reply to Mr. C.

Mr. CONSTABLE made a rejoinder, which drew forth a sur-
rejoinder from Mr. D.

On motion, the Convention adjourned till 4 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess appealed to the gentleman
from Madison to remain on the committee. He and his friends
were fully satisfied of the purity of the motives of the gentleman
from Madison in what had taken place.

Mr. EDWARDS, of Madison said, he had no feeling of resent-
ment towards anyone in that hall. He had acted only in obedience
to a sense of duty towards the committee. The cause of his
request was not here, for he felt that no one then would suspect his
motives or attribute to him anything dishonorable, but when the
published proceedings of this day are sent forth with such com-
ments as might be made, the imputation that he had endeavored
to supplant the honorable gentleman as the head of that com-
mittee, would be placed upon him. This is why he desired to be

250 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

excused from the committee. He would leave the matter with
the Convention.

The resolution offered by Mr. Hayes being withdrawn at the
request of Mr E., the request of that gentleman to be excused
was unanimously refused.

Mr. CHURCHILL'S application was also refused.

Mr. Z. CASEY, from the committee on Revenue, to which had
been referred the resolution directing them to inquire &c., of fixing
a maximum rate of taxation, reported the same back and asked to
be discharged from the further consideration of the same. Agreed
to.

Mr. SHARPE offered the following resolution; which was
adopted:

Resolved, That the 1 1 th section of the 2d article of the present
constitution be referred to the committee on the Organization of
Departments and Officers connected with the Executive Depart-
ment.

Messrs. Marshall of Mason, Vernor, Scates, Thornton,
Davis of Massac, Kinney of St. Clair, Cross of Winnebago and
Powers offered resolutions of inquiry which were referred to
appropriate committees. No copies of the same having been
furnished, we are unable to give them.

Mr. SERVANT offered the following resolution; which was
adopted:

Resolved, That the committee on the Judiciary be instructed
to inquire into the expediency of exempting persons having con-
scientious scruples, from serving on juries, upon such terms as
shall be deemed reasonable and just.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess offered the following; which
was adopted:

Resolved, That the Executive committee be requested to inquire
into the expediency of inserting in the constitution a clause pro-
viding for the election of sheriffs for term of years, and making

them ineligible for more than one year consecutively.
And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

XVIII. MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Green, of Tazewell.

Mr. CANADY offered a resolution, that the committee on
Incorporations report a clause, to be incorporated into the consti-
tution, granting banking privileges upon certain conditions.

Mr. MARKLEY offered a substitute, that said committee
should report a clause prohibiting banks.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to lay the subject on the table.
Lost — yeas 62, nays 49. [sic]

Mr. SINGLETON offered a resolution of inquiry in relation
to officers for life. Carried.

BANKS

Mr. SCATES moved that the Convention go into committee
of the whole, and take up the subjects made the special order of
the day for Friday last; which motion was carried, and the Con-
vention resolved itself into committee of the whole, Mr. Edwards
of Sangamon, in the Chair.

The propositions submitted by Messrs. Churchill, McCallen
and Gregg, were taken up by the committee.

Mr. SCATES offered the following:

Whereas, the power "to regulate commerce with foreign nations,
and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes," and
"to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin,
and fix the standard of weights and measures" has been granted
exclusively to the United States, and the power "to coin money,
emit bills of credit, make anything but gold and silver coin a
tender in payment of debts" has been prohibited to the States;
therefore.

Resolved, That the States ought not to attempt to do indirectly
what they have no power to do directly.

Resolved, That the committee on Incorporations be instructed
to inquire into the expediency of submitting, for the consideration
of the people at the polls, whether they wish or desire to place a
251

1S1 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

total prohibition upon the Legislature to attempt to create, extend
or authorize any banking powers or privileges in this State, or any
exclusive powers or privileges not common to other citizens.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that he did not rise to
detain the Convention by any lengthy remarks, but he desired
to express his views upon this question. — He was one of those who
were opposed to banks of any kind or under any system; and he
came from a region in this State where the people were all opposed
to banks. He, himself, had always been opposed to banks, either
local or State banks. He looked upon the present as one of the
most important questions that was to be decided by this Conven-
tion, indeed, it was more important than any other, for it would
have a great weight upon the interests of the people, their pros-
perity and trade. It would, also, affect, more than any other
single question, the fate of the Constitution which this Convention
would adopt. The Convention had a different task to perform
than had the Convention which framed the constitution of the
United States. The delegates to that Convention came from
different States, and endeavored to retain all the power to the
States which was possible, and they gave Congress the power to
pass no laws the power to pass which was not expressly stated in
the constitution. Our duty is different. Our Legislature may
pass any law which is not forbidden by the constitution, or which
does not come in conflict with the constitution of the United States.
This great power, thus vested in the Legislature, pointed out the
necessity of placing some restrictions in the constitution upon
their committing any acts affecting the happiness, wealth and
prosperity of the people. He remembered the time when there
was but one bank in the State, and he remembered, also when
there was but one newspaper — published at Edwardsville. He,
also, well remembered how this paper would publish lists of the
banks whose notes would be received at the land office, and that
when men in Kentucky and other States would bring those bank
notes here to invest in land, they would find that the list published
the week before had been stricken out and new banks inserted. In
1 8 19 the Edwardsville bank closed. The Legislature then tried
their hand again, and created the bank at Vandalia, whose notes
bore 1 per cent, interest. These went for some time, and after

MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1847 253

awhile they became so depreciated that they passed two for one,
and then three for one. The Legislature finally passed a law to
cut the notes in half so that each end of a dollar bill should be
taken for half a dollar, and the halves of a $2 bill for $1.50. This
state of things continued a long while, and the notes became so
depreciated that they sold for a trifle; speculators made fortunes
by buying them up. The treasury finally redeemed them. — From
1824 to 1835 we had no banks, and I ask any man if, during that
time, we were not prosperous and out of debt? Drovers from
Pennsylvania and elsewhere came here and bought up the stock
of our people, and paid them in cash for it, and all things went on
well. We were prospering slowly but surely. There were no
suits going on, except litigated cases; no suits before justices of
the peace, except when parties disputed, or where men were unable
to pay the debt.

In 1834 or '2s the Legislature chartered a State bank, and
revived the Shawneetown and Cairo banks, and these institutions
scattered their branches all over the State; and then we commenced
the internal improvement system, which would never had [sic]
been the case had it not been for the inflated currency of these
banks — then came the rise in the prices of everything — pork went
up suddenly to 5I, cows to J 10, and labor from ^10 per month to
$20 — all the people made calculations upon the existing prices,
and all embarked in speculation. Such always are the calculations
made by people under such a sudden change of aff'airs, even
experienced merchants commenced speculating. But, sir, the
system of internal improvements was broken up. Then came the
reaction. Everything went down faster than it had come up.
Pork to I5, labor to $7.50, and the whole people became in
debt. Not because they had not the property, but because they
had no money, and their produce would not bring what they had
calculated it would. The banks are all broken up, and we now
feel the consequences of the evils they worked. We find ourselves
in debt to the amount of thirteen or fourteen millions! They had,
also a demoralizing efi^ect upon the people. Many young men
(indeed, all turned speculators,) threw off their jeans coats, became
too proud to work upon their fathers' farms, and might be seen
dressed in the finest style, looking like physicians or the greatest

254 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

aristocrats. All upon credit! We come here to reform our State
government; we are about to adopt measures to relieve the State
of her debt — farmers are realizing fair prices for their products, the
State, so far as individuals are concerned, is out of debt — though
every thing heretofore has been tending to our ruin — and we are
fast going out of difficulties into which that system had led us.
If these things really are, if farmers are receiving the best prices, &c.,
where the necessity of banks? I hope the gentlemen will point
us to the necessity for banks. They ought to do so, for they
propose a system filled with horrors, and they should show the
necessity for its adoption. It is too late in the day for gentlemen
to say that banks are necessary to raise the value of our property.
The demand always regulates the value of an article.

What is the staple of Illinois? Pork, beef and flour. Are
banks necessary for the sale and purchase of these? Are we not
an agricultural State, and are banks necessary for us? No, sir.
These products find a market elsewhere and not in this State.
Banks cannot raise their price, people must come here from
abroad to purchase those articles, and the price will always be
regulated by the demand. Gentlemen say they are opposed to
banks, yet will not vote for a prohibitory clause; and I must reply
to what was said by the gentleman from Christian the other day
when the vote was taken on this subject. He said, that he was
opposed to banks, that they were a curse and an evil, that they
were horrible to his feelings, but that he would vote against a
prohibitory clause because it would endanger the adoption of the
constitution. Does that gentleman think that the people are in
favor of banks? Does he think that the majority of his party ,are
in favor of them? I represent two counties — Bond and Mont-
gomery— both counties, without distinction of party, are opposed
to banks in any form. Gentlemen should remember that no
petition for banks has been presented to the Convention, and no
petition against a prohibitory clause. The whole difficulty was,
that these fears had taken possession of the brains of these gentle-
men— How do they act on other questions? It is asked, must
we cut down the number of the Legislature? They answer "Oh,
yes!" Must we reduce their pay? "By all means, yes." Must
we reduce the pay of the judges, of the Governor, and regulate

MONDAY y JUNE 28, 1847 255

the duties of all other officers? They unhesitatingly answer,
"Oh, yes.". But on this question of the banks, they cry out, "you
should not bind up the hands of the people on that subject, but
leave it for future time." They say, further, that though the
people now may be opposed to banks, and we would vote against
them, but perhaps the people may change their minds hereafter
and want banks, and we should not close the matter by a prohibi-
tory clause. Why, sir, the very same reason would allow all parts
of the constitution to be left open to suit every change of opinion.
The people of his county said that the Legislature already had
too much power, and, among other reforms, desired it to be
restricted. He understood that on the table was a proposition to
adopt the New York banking law, which had been introduced
because it was said that there was a majority against the prohibi-
tory clause. Sir, if Illinois was composed of materials that would
burn, I would rather see her destroyed by fire than such a system
of plundering and robbing introduced in this our own prairie
State. If a general banking system be spread over this State, we
may look for ruin, blast, blight and mildew to come upon us. If
we are to have banks, let us have no general laws throwing open
the State and extending an invitation to shavers and brokers to
come amongst us; if we do, we will have the scenes of Wisconsin
over again, and we will have red dog, worse than red dog, banks
amongst us. — He was not desirous to misrepresent or criminate
gentlemen who, no doubt, represented the views of their constitu-
ents as well as he, but we must judge of the future by the past.
We are ripe for speculation, and he asked gentlemen not to throw
out to the people these inducements to forsake their business and
employments, to enter into this scheme of speculation, which
would bring upon them nothing but blast and blight.

Mr. GREGG said, that when he had introduced the proposition
submitted by him and now on the table, he did so with reference
to the peculiar state of circumstances existing at the time. From
the vote taken a few days before, he thought it was the intention
of the Convention that some system of banks should be adopted.
I thought that if this was to be the result that we should close the
door to a general and unrestricted system. I thought we had
better leave the abstract question alone and judge things and act

256 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

on them as we find them; that we should take into consideration
how our resources, condition and facilities stood and leave theories
out of the question. The people of my county are divided on this
question, but I believe that a majority of them are opposed to
banks and banking, because they believe they are prejudicial and
injurious to the whole country and people. He, after weighing
all these matters, had come to the conclusion that if we were to
have banks we should so restrict them by our constitutional
provision that they would be as little of prejudice and injury as
possible; and that the floodgates should not be left open and all
the evils flowing from an unrestricted system of banking to come
upon us with all its evils and calamitous consequences. If there
be any inconsistency in what had been done he saw it not in his
position nor in the proposition he had introduced, but in those
who, failing in a prohibition, will leave this matter to the Legis-
lature. Was not his course more in accordance with their duty
as men not legislating for the present time, but for the whole State,
and for all future time? He thought we should study the banks
in their consequences, and in such a manner as will allow us to
deliberate understandingly, and with the best views to the advance-
ment of the prosperity of the people. We are now without banks;
we' have had an experience — and he might say an experience of
ruin, misfortune and disaster — of them, and shall we bring that ruin
and misfortune upon the people again? Do we need them?
We are an agricultural State and not a commercial one. It was
the intention of the framers of the constitution of the United
States that there should be no currency but gold and silver. There
had been issued during the revolution over 300 millions of paper
money and it had been the currency during that time and much
depreciated. Its evils were so apparent that they introduced
into the constitution a regulation that the government should
emit no bills of exchange. But means were soon found to evade
this, and the country has been since flooded with this kind of a
currency. How is it, he would ask, that our prosperity is peri-
odical, and "good times" occasional? It was owing to the creation
of these monopolies, who [sic] raised and depressed the trade and
commerce, and the means of the people, by their schemes of specu-
lation. We ought to be always prosperous, we have the means

MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1847 257

and resources within us, to have that prosperity continued, and it
must be owing to these monopolies created by our Legislature,
which conferred upon them privileges and rights which were not
enjoyed by the people in common. He would prefer that all
privileges and rights should be distributed that, like the dews of
heaven, all might share alike. The benefits are not equally dis-
tributed to all classes alike, but special privileges are granted to
special persons to eat out the substance of the people. To these
chartered monopolies we may trace all our misfortunes. Mr. G.
then refer[r]ed to the banking operations in England, where he
said there had been from 1793 to 1826, 381 failures in a brief
period of 34 years, after which he proceeded to review the history
of the banks, their failures, suspensions, and the losses caused by
them to the people and Government of the United States. He said
that from the time of the war to 18 19 — the paper currency was in
a most wretched condition, that in 18 19, there came a general
suspension; in 1825 the panic was universal. In 1837, the paper
currency system had become inflated to its utmost capacity and
the bubble burst, and ruin was universal; every man's fortune was
afl^ected by it. Let us carry out an unrestricted system of banking,
and panic and ruin will come upon us in all its unmitigated
horrors and evil consequences.

In 1839 banks again suspended, and similar consequences
ensued — and thus from 18 17 to '39 there had been no less than
eight general suspensions of this inflated paper currency. Have
the people suffered nothing from a paper currency? Mr. G. read
from the report of the Secretary of the Treasury of the United
States, made in 1841, by which it appeared, that the loss sustained
by the federal government up to February, 1841, by the employ-
ment of banks and paper money was ^15,492,000! That since
1789 there had been three hundred and ninety-six bank failures
in the United States, with the following capital: Capital of
twenty banks failed before 18 11, $3,000,000; between 181 1 and
'30, one hundred and ninety-five banks with a capital of $36,787,-
309; since 1830 upwards of 181 (including the Bank of the United
States) with an estimated capital of $95,000,000. Making an
aggregate amount of capital of these banks of $134,787,309. He
also read the following as losses sustained by the people since 1789:

258 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

By bank failures on capital, circulation, deposites, and bank
balances, $108,855,721; by suspension of specie payments and
depreciation of notes, $95,000,000; by destruction, war and acci-
dents, $7,127,332; by counterfeit notes beyond losses by coin,
$4,444,444; by fluctuation in bank currency, &c., $150,000,000;
making an aggregate of $365,451,497; to which add the capital of
the United States Bank of Pennsylvania, $35,000,000, and the
total loss will be $400,451,497. Are not these, he asked, matters
of a startling character, and which are undoubtedly a history of
the evils of an unmitigated nature, bringing destruction and ruin
upon the people. And any system which contains within it the
principles of such ruin, and which may produce all these alarming
consequences, should be well inquired into, and he thought they
should hesitate long in adopting it. There were at present up-
wards of nine hundred banks in the country. Their universal
rule was to over-issue notes in a proportion of three dollars to one
on their capital; and in this way they fabricate their own wealth,
and who does not see that they thus have conferred upon them
an inconceivable advantage, and that they can go into market
with this increased capital and drive away all competition, and of
necessity must monopolize all the business and trade of the country.
Another thing in the system of banks, was that the capital is
not usually paid in, a small proportion only is paid and the balance
secured by the notes of the stockholders. For instance — the first
United States Bank had a capital of $10,000,000, of which was
paid in, one-half a million; the second Bank of the United States
had a capital of $35,000,000, and only two million was paid in.
Yet upon this small amount of capital actually paid into the bank,
the discounts and dealings in exchange during one year and a
little over, amounted to $43,000,000. And this, sir, is but a
specimen of the transactions that are carried on under this system —
styled banks and banking. In 1840 the total amount of bank
capital in the United States was $360,000,000, and the total
amount of specie collected in their vaults was $33,000,000. Their
loans and discounts on notes amounted to $460,000,000. It was
also their practice to make large loans to presidents and directors,
without security, and in 1840, there was due by directors of the
banks to the several banks the sum of $150,000,000, and one-third

MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1847 259

of this was due on loans. By a report of a committee appointed
to examine the affairs of the United States Bank it appeared that
there was due that bank by one Thomas Kidwell, a broker in
Philadelphia, over $11,000,000, which had been loaned out to him
for the purpose of shaving. At the same time that that bank was
loaning out this great sum to that man, loans were refused to good
men of that city and upon responsible paper; and they were obliged
to go to this broker and pay him large discounts, thus forcing men
to pay them indirectly by this shaving, what they could not charge
directly, and this too, upon well secured paper. He thought it
would be conceded by all that any system of banking was highly
dangerous. Is there, he asked, in the whole system of government
a greater power conferred than that of creating a currency? And
if this power is to be exerted it should be in the hands of the govern-
ment and not placed in the control of irresponsible corporations,
institutions or associations. It is a power not to be conferred
upon any body of incorporated individuals, no matter now respect-
able they might be, or the standing they occupied in the world.

It is destructive upon business, it creates uncertainty in trade,
and makes the business of the country a mere lottery. It is also
destructive of the morals of the community. In 1824 the banking
issues in the U.S. was [j/V] 140,000,000; in 1837 they had increased to
$140,000,000, and at this time was the great suspension. In 1843
they had decreased to $53,000,000, and in 1846, they had gone up to
$105,000,000, nearly doubling in the last three years. I shall use these
facts, when more properly in order, to show the great uncertainty
which these enlarged bank issues create. It had been admitted
by the head of the U. S. Bank, a man who certainly had great
experience in banking, and with all its business, that the tendency
of all banks was to create an over issue of paper. And thus it
gave them a great advantage over the rest of the community, while
the over issue was thrown out into the market. When this occurs,
it produces over-trading, and every man embarks in business and
speculation — prices increase — the laborer receives higher prices,
and so with all other business. The currency is inflated,fand
business becomes inflated just as unnaturally^as is'^everything^else.
Wherever this happens to be the case, then'!]the^importations_^in-
crease and immense quantities of goods are brought into^the

26o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

country. After a while these goods are to be paid for, and the
currency of this country — these bank notes, which they can have
so plentifully, will not answer to pay for them, and the specie which
is hoarded up in the banks must be drawn out, and goes abroad
to pay for these very goods. Then commences the ruin. The
banks deprived of their little specie, are cramped in their business
and forced immediately to curtail. Then follows the distress and
ruin, and panic. This, sir, is the consequence of over trading,
which is always followed by a reverse, and then is destroyed the
fanciedprosperity of men's speculations. Can it be attributed to
anything else than the over issues by these chartered monopolies?

In 1837 the indebtedness to the banks of the Union was 525
millions, the specie in their vaults, and on which their issues were
based, was 38,000,000. On this small sum of 38,000,000 was the
great paper money bubble based, and which when exploded cast
ruin, misfortune and destruction upon all classes of the community.
When these banks are obliged to make these forced collections
they generally so manage it as to become the purchasers of all the
property, particularly of the real estate of their creditors, which
gives them a power and influence which is highly dangerous to
the people, and the State.

What necessity have we for them? Why should we desire to
obtain a currency or encourage institutions which have within
their system the elements of so much ruin and destruction?

It is said that there is not specie enough in the country, to buy
our goods and enable us to carry on our trade. This is not the
conclusion I have come to after an examination of the subject.
Mr. G. here read an extract from some work, which treated of the
subject, which stated that according to Mr. Gallatin's calcula-
tion, made in 1831, there was in the world ^400,000,000 in specie,
that of this sum there was over ^277,000,000 in Europe and
U. States, and that if divided there would be $16 [for] every man,
woman and child in the country.

He here read an extract from 'Gouge on Banking' to sustain
this position. He said that he thought this sufficient to prove
that banks were not needed for the purpose of creating a currency,
and that there was enough of specie to transact all business.

The experience of other countries was not to be disregarded.

MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1847 261

and he would refer the gentleman to France, at the time of the
revolution. They had a paper currency, which had sprung up
during that time, more trifling and depreciated than was our own
during the revolution.

Assignats were issued all over the country in large and danger-
ous quantities, and had become worthless and depreciated.
Napoleon, when he became first consul, with intuitive sagacity
and profound knowledge of such things, the moment he had the
power, broke up the whole system of paper money and introduced
a new order of things. He established a metallic currency. He
said no paper for a less amount than five hundred francs should be
issued; and gold and silver flowed in in abundance, and to this
day they have a metallic currency.

Such would be the case here were we not cursed with these
banking institutions. Look at Cuba, she is not cursed with paper
or bank issues, and has nothing but gold and silver. I may be
met with the remark that these countries are not republican, that
their forms of government and institutions are diflFerent from ours,
Is this a proper answer? If the people of France live not under a
system of government like ours, must we not follow them in any-
thing? We must not look to them for examples of wisdom,
moderation, science, or justice, because they live under a monarchy
Nor must we look to Europe for such examples, nor refer to Cuba.
No matter if the autocrat of northern Europe, or the sultan from
his harem, gives us an example of wisdom, must we throw it away,
reject it, put it behind our backs, because it comes not from the
same kind of government! Sir, good examples and just principles
belong to no nation or creed, or State, or form of government. I
take leave, before I conclude, to refer briefly to the plan I have
proposed, and which is now before the committee. It is divested
so far as possible of the features of monopolies, and I have pre-
sented it in this shape so that, if these banks or some system is to
exist, and its blighting effects are to be cast upon the people, its
rough and rugged features shall be thrown away. It is not the
New York system of banking, as has been said — it goes beyond
that system. Another safe-guard, I think, is, that it leaves the
matter with the people; the action of the Legislature is not final,
and after they shall have acted upon it it must go to the

262 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

people, and there fiat must be passed upon it. Here we have a
double safe-guard — the wisdom of the Legislature, and the action
of the people, who may trample on foot any act of the Legis-
lature. Again, if, after it shall be thus approved of by the people
and the Legislature, it shall appear to be more productive of evil
than was anticipated, it is placed in the power of any Legislature
to repeal or abolish it.

If any system is to go from this Convention to throw its blight-
ing influence on the people, their business and their resources, let
it go without throwing open these safeguards upon its actions.
I think it would be better for the Convention to adopt a system
of banking and a prohibitory clause — an alternate proposition,
and submit them to the people; let them be discussed in the
primary assemblages of the people, and I have no fear of the result;
no fear of the adoption of the prohibitory clause by a large majority.
But if we are to have any system, let me have choice of one which
is the least calculated to work injury.

Mr. LOUDON said, that he had listened with pleasure to [the]
very good speech of the gentleman, and he, Mr. L., were he an
anti-bank man, would now try and make an anti-bank speech, but
as he was a bank man he would make a bank speech. Mr. L.
spoke for some time, in reply to Mr. Gregg, and in support of a good
banking system. His remarks are unavoidably crowded out.

Mr. SCATES said, he did not expect to throw much light on
the subject, but the question, it was not to be denied, was one of all
absorbing interest, and one on which the two political parties were
divided. Much as gentlemen might regret the introduction of
party questions in a Convention assembled to frame a constitution,
they must not expect to see parties forget their party principles.
This was a question on which there could be no compromise.
Those opposed to banks would not consent to any form of a bank
that would be acceptable to the friends of a bank, and these bank
men would not vote for a prohibition.

If I attempt to give my views on the subject, gentlemen must
not think me desirous to be too wise, when I say that in my opinion
the people of Illinois have spoken solemnly, firmly and positively,
that there shall be no banks in the State, and no compromise will
be acceptable to them. I remember to have often read and heard

MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1847 263

of such a thing as a judicious tariff, and that it was soon found
out that a judicious tariff means nothing definite, for every man
undertook to define and judge what sort of a tariflF was a judicious
one. It is something the same way with a "well regulated bank,"
here is the same difficulty — no two will agree what is a well regu-
lated bank. Sir, there never was such a thing as a well regulated
bank submitted to the people; nor can any man propose one.
The gentleman from Cook, who says he is opposed to all banks,
has submitted a plan of what he considers a well regulated bank.
But are there no objections to it? I know one, sir, and an impor-
tant one, which for fear I may forget it, I will repeat it at once.
His plan will not prevent a suspension of specie payments; I ask
him if it is not so?

Mr. GREGG said, that there was an express provision that
the Legislature should pass no law permitting a suspension of
specie payments.

Mr. SCATES. I understand it correctly. But does the law
prevent the bank from suspending? and that currency becoming
depreciated in the hands of the bill holders. There is no way to
prevent the bank from suspending; no remedy for the loss to the
bill holder. Will any gentleman propose that the loss to the bill
holder shall be put into his pocket from the treasury of the State
The winding up of a bank may be a punishment, but will it remedy
the evil? The fact of suspension, is a fact that no written prohibi-
tion can avoid, and no parchment prohibition can pay the loss on
paper depreciated, perhaps, 50 cents in the dollar. Nor can we
say that the bank, if it fails and its paper becomes depreciated,
shall pay the bill holder, unless we give the bank the means to do
so with. The gentleman's position is an enigma to me, and I'll
not undertake to unriddle it. He has portrayed in the most vivid
colors that the banks are evils, and has said that the people will
sustain a prohibitory clause, yet he has come to the conclusion
that we must have banks. This is truly an enigma to me. One
objection to a prohibitory clause is, that it forever binds the
people who may hereafter desire a bank. If we were to recognize
the principle that we must act, in framing this constitution, with
due regard to the changes of the popular mind, we had better go
home at once, for that would defeat the ends of all constitution. —

a64 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The bill of rights says, that no man shall be dis[s]eized of his freehold ;
no man shall be punished without a trial by his peers; no ex post
facto law shall be passed; the people's mind may change on either
or all of these principles, and why should we place them in our
supreme law of the State? Who will advocate this? But gentle-
men desire this loose action on the bank question, which will be
as great a tyranny as any other. If I have any idea of the opinion
of the people of Illinois upon this subject, if I have not definite
information of their views, then say I have no information at all.
They are opposed to banks. Sir, for the last several years the
whole democratic press of the State — with perhaps one exception —
spoke out openly their opposition to banks, and the politicians
throughout the State have opposed the banks, and I have thought
that the people have sustained them in their position. But I
come here, and what do I find? The democratic party divided
upon this subject, here with instructions to vote against a prohibi-
tory clause, and the party are in a glorious minority. — We have been
told that the democratic party have the majority in this State, in
the Legislature and in the Convention, that they are responsible for
everything that has been done and which this Convention shall do,
because they have the strength and the numbers to rule. I admit
that the democratic party had the majority and the power, but
not at present and I cannot illustrate its position better than by
relating an anecdote. It is said that there was one John Thompson
who had been up to the market and had started on his way home.
Unfortunately, however, John fell asleep, and the oxen pulled the
cart into a mud hole; while it was there two yoke of the oxen broke
from their cart, strayed away and are now looking with anxious
eyes into the rich pasture of banks and banking privileges to
which they and their friends are about to be admitted. John
Thompson was unable to get his cart out because of the loss of his
team, and gentlemen must not throw the responsibility on the
democratic party. Our team has been stolen, and they must not
expect us to pull the government cart out of the mud until we
get back our team; and others after starting on this metallic
road, their feet have become cut and a little tender and they too,
have gone off and refuse to pull.

The position of certain gentlemen reminded him also of another

MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1847 265

anecdote: Two gentlemen went out hunting, after some time one
of them fired at a deer, his friend hearing the rifle shot, came up
and asked him what he had shot at, he replied, "At a deer, there
it is." "Why,"' said the friend, "that is a calf; have you shot your
neighbor's calf?" "No," answered he. "I shot so that if it
was a deer I would kill it, and if a calf I would miss it." So it was
with those who were against a bank — if it was a bank, but for a
calf &c. Let gentlemen aim so as to shoot but not to kill their
neighbor's calf. And these gentlemen who were so anxious to
preserve their neighbor's calf, to them he could wish no greater
punishment than did Aaron and the other idolaters receive when
they built their golden calf, from the hands of the Almighty.

Mr. S. then said, the question was not whether the banks will
suspend, it should be, can they? Yes, sir, they can, and may
suspend, no constitutional provision can avoid it; the power is in
banks to cause losses of millions to the community, and there is
no way to prevent it but one — that is, not to allow them to be in-
corporated. Another way in which these banks caused losses to
the community was, that all bank paper, at any distance from the
banks, was at a discount of 5 per cent., and the loss to the people
upon the amount of the total issues of the bank was immense. A
note is at 5 per cent, discount, it is passed at that depreciated
value, one hundred times a year. Say the discount is at two
per cent., the loss is, therefore, 200 per cent, on the face of the
note, and all this loss is paid for the use of a paper currency.
Mr. S. illustrated this view by several examples, and then examined
many facts in relation to the management, frauds and evils result-
ing from banks in general, and the bank of the United States in
particular. In one single year, he said, the defalcation by presi-
dents and directors of these banks amounted to forty-two millions
of dollars and over; and if gentlemen were prepared to go for
the adoption of such a system, which could produce such results,
he doubted their statesmanship. Half that loss would pay. the
whole expenses of the Mexican war, or support a war against a
more powerful enemy; yet it was all borne without complaint.
The loss to the government up to the year 1842, was $131,000,000,
a sum equal to the expenses of the last war with Great Britain.

Mr. SCATES, after alluding at great length to the fact of the

266 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

losses by banks and banking speculations in the United States,
which he read and exhibited by statistical references, differing but
little from those mentioned by Mr. Gregg, and applying the alarm-
ing consequences of them to the state of the people and the finances
of Illinois, he most earnestly and forcibly deprecated the adoption
of any system of the kind in the State, or the granting to the Legis-
lature any power to create the same.

He said, that he hoped, in case the Convention, watched by
bank harpies and beset by sharks, shall spawn forth upon the
public a shoal of banks, that it would be rejected by the people
and the system be an abortion. If they were to have banks
with chartered privileges, why not allow every man to be a bank,
and grant him permission to issue $2> to every one of his capital?
This would be nothing more than equal rights. But then, again,
poor men have not the means to enter into this plan, which confers
upon those who can engage in it, the power to make their less
fortunate neighbors hewers of wood and drawers of water.

Mr. S. then entered into an able argument to establish that by
the constitution of the United States the States had no power to
create banks, which, he said, indirectly governed, created, and
ruled the currency — regulated, by their issues and over issues, the
value of money — governed and controlled the commerce among
the States of the Union, raising the value of our property by the
extent of their issues, and depreciating it again by the contraction
and lessening of them. He thought it dangerous to create these
institutions, possessed of these great and powerful means of power
over the interests of the people.

He thought that they had just as much right to issue imitation
half dollars and eagles in base metal as to issue paper imitations
of the current coin of the country.

At 12, M., without concluding, he gave way to a motion to
adjourn till to-morrow, at 9, a. m.

XIX. TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Dresser.

Mr. HAYES, from the committee on Law Reform, reported
back sundry resolutions, and asked to be discharged from the
further consideration of the same. Agreed to.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to take up certain reports made by the
committee on the Revenue and the committee on the Legislative
Department, and refer the same to the committee of the whole.
Carried.

Mr. ARCHER moved to refer the report of the committee on
the Organization of Departments to the committee of the whole.
Carried.

Mr. Z. CASEY then moved that the Convention resolve itself
into committee of the whole to take up the subject of banks.
Carried.

The Convention then resolved itself into a committee of
the whole, Mr. Edwards of Sangamon in the Chair.

Mr. SCATES resumed his speech, commenced yesterday, by a
recapitulation of the arguments presented by him. He said that
the power of the States to create banks, with powers to emit bills
of exchange, &c. was one that was sanctioned by general practice.
Yet there were many questions arising out of constitutional pro-
visions that had been settled by practice, but upon which the
public mind was not settled. The power of the general govern-
ment to charter a United States bank, though two had been
created, and the supreme court had decided in favor of the power,
was still a question upon which the public mind was not settled;
and the same was the case in regard to the issues of State banks.
He then examined the constitution of the United States, and
argued against the power of the States to issue such notes, or the
power to incorporate any institution to do the same.

He said that we had the power to limit the circulation of
267

268 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

bank notes from other States in this State. It was an evil to have
our own issues in circulation, it was certainly no less an evil to
have the notes of banks, over which we had no control, circulating
amongst us. We might not be able to compel a bank in another
State to stop her issues; but should we, to stop their circulation,
issue our own notes? This was like giving a man, suffering from
the effects of poison, a larger dose of the same kind. He read
some tables which showed that the people paid yearly for the use
of bank paper, in the shape of interest, $28,000,000 more than the
annual expenses of the government. There was also a deprecia-
tion on the amount of their issue of 5 per cent., which, together
with other losses by counterfeiting and wearing of notes, made an
aggregate annual tax to the people of over $50,000,000; more
than double the amount required for the support of this vast
government. The loss to the people, since the formation of the
government, by taxes for the use of bank paper, amounted to
$1,197,000,000.

His recollection of the politics of Illinois for many years had
been, that the democratic party were opposed to all banks. Every
democratic meeting that had been held sent forth a condemnation
of them. There had been a meeting held in this hall some three
years ago, and then this question came up. No man was for
banks. It was made a sine qua non in each candidate, to be
opposed to all banks. The democratic party now required from
their representatives a condemnation of them. The people were
not, however, truly represented here; if they were, there would
go forth a universal condemnation of them, as he was sure the
voice of the people was for a prohibition. He was in favor of no
experiments to elicit the voice of the people, by proposing any
alternate proposition. The sentiments of the people were known,
and the Convention should carry them out.

Mr. HARVEY said, that he, perhaps, should define his posi-
tion. He looked upon this question as one of deep and lasting
importance, and one which bears more upon the daily transactions
of the people than any other which the Convention would be
called to act upon. He thought that when the Convention would
meet, the members would come there with their minds made up
to act without political feeling, and with a desire to accomplish a

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 269

constitutional work for the people. But he had been sadly mis-
taken. The gentleman said it must be a political question; that
parties must be divided, and that we must congeal into the consti-
tution the ultra spirit of party. The gentleman said that one
John Thompson was like the democratic party, and that John
had once got drunk and had been run into a mud hole; that while
there a part of his team had got away and had gone off in search
of green pastures. He would like to know why John Thompson
got drunk, or if, when asleep, he dreamed of this metallic currency?
And was it not wiser for the cattle, when John was in this
condition, to get out of the mud hole, and go off to the green
pasture? He would tell the gentleman, that if he wanted these
cattle back to pull this democratic cart out of the mud he must
not get drunk. He claimed to be a member of the democratic
party, but he came there a free one, to act for himself and not to
bow his neck as a slave to any leader. He was not one of John
Thompson's cattle. He was a representative of the people of
Knox county in this Convention to form a constitution. And,
sir, what have we met here for? Not to take care of the interests
of one little political party, but of one million of people- Asa
member of the committee on Incorporations he was anxious to
hear this question discussed, and for one he was opposed to a
prohibitory clause. And the party who advocated this, were
they united? No, sir.

Mr. H. said, that one portion of this prohibitory party said
that banks were an evil, and that all things of an evil character
should be prohibited. By inserting in the constitution a prohibi-
tion, and then adding a clause that that prohibition should be
forever unalterable, how, he would ask, would any man vote for
such a provision — John Thompson could not do it— if he did he
would render himself immortal. Another of the party said, that
he was for an exclusively metallic currency. Does he intend to
exclude from circulation Auditor's warrants and Treasury notes,
which looked to him very much like paper money? He would
not say what he wanted — but he desired to know what kind of a
prohibition that party wanted? He did not believe the demo-
cratic party was in the hands of fifty or forty men in that Conven-
tion, but were scattered all over the Union, and in no State had a

270 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

prohibitory clause been inserted in the constitution against banks.
He believed that the people of any State, by a majority of the
votes, might have what kind of government they pleased, and
that they alone had the right to say whether they would have
banks or not. He was for leaving the question of banks open to the
people's opinion, and he was met by a question, why not leave
the whole question open. He replied by saying, that all things
wrong in themselves should be prohibited, but a mere political
question should be left open to the people. Public opinion was
stronger than any constitution: a prohibition was no more than
a rope of sand against it, and who could say that in five years the
people's opinion would not be changed. Our duty was not to
inquire what kind of a bank we should have, but whether we
should have a bank at all or not. We have no banks to decapitate,
but gentlemen seem disposed to decapitate a possibility of a bank.
He would prefer the Legislature should not have the power to
create, but was willing that when they thought a bank necessary
that they should pass a law and submit it to the people, and if a
majority of them approved of it, it might go into force. Individ-
ually he was opposed to all systems of banking. They all seemed
in favor of abridging the powers of the Legislature, and he was in
favor of it; but was any man in favor of abridging the powers of
the people?

Mr. ARCHER desired to define his position on this question,
and he hoped that when he had concluded, the Convention would
be more happy in arriving at what his position was, than he had
been in arriving at the position of the gentleman from Knox. He
was not one of those who felt disposed to follow in everything that
was laid down by those who set themselves up as umpires of what
was true democracy; he was a member of the democratic party of
the whole Union, and claimed to think and act for himself in all
things; and bowed to no leader on this floor or any where else. He
knew no one who aspired to that leadership, nor could he think
or believe that any man, either whig or democrat, had come into
that deliberative body with a desire to prescribe the course which
they should follow. If any one did aspire, however, to lead the
party, he would follow him only so far as his principles and opinions
agreed with his, and no further. He was, individually, opposed

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 271

to all banks, of any shape, kind, manner or description; while he
entertained these opinions, he had no desire to hold those opinions
out as a beacon light to others, nor to give a guide to his seniors in
their actions here. His experience had been that the system of
banking was but the granting of privileges to a few to commit piracy
on the masses. In using this language he intended to cast no
imputation upon others, but he hoped they would consider him as
sincere in what he said.

He thought States were like individuals in many cases. Let
us look back for a period of ten years in the history of this then
young and thriving State, at that time a Legislature, driven to
madness by the evidences of prosperity to be seen all around them,
created an extensive and wild scheme of internal improvements,
and the result was that the scheme failed and the hope of the
young State was blasted and blighted. It was only after the
destruction had come upon them that the people became
alarmed — then that the State credit sunk abroad — and the unholy
doctrine of repudiation received countenance in the State, and I
regret to say that even, in this State, though for a short time only,
did this doctrine receive encouragement. We have in part
recovered the effects of that time, and have somewhat remedied
the evil, and from this Convention, is expected something to
remedy still further the evil consequences of that day. While I
give my hearty approval of some of the remarks of the gentleman
from Cook, I regret he did not plant himself entirely on the ground
of prohibition. He had displayed by statistics the innumerable
evils of these banks. I am in favor of a prohibitory clause, but I
would prefer that it should be submitted to the people sep-
erately {sic\ from the constitution in order that the latter may
not be affected by the vote upon the proposition. Let those in
favor of banks bring forward their plan, and those who desire the
prohibition, let them go forth to the people and fight side by side,
and by the result of that fight will I be satisfied. He was opposed
to all banks and in favor of the utmost restrictions. How much
time and money have been wasted in Illinois by legislating for
suspension laws; and we cannot too strongly guard against failure,
for I think failure is a consequence of incorporation. When these
failures come, who is it that hold the notes — the poor and laboring

272 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

classes of the community, and on them falls the loss. Who are
they that watch the value of these notes from par to depreciation,
and to worthlessness — the rich and the monied man. Do you
find these notes in the hands of the brokers when at full value?
No, but you may find them in their hands when depreciated,
bought up at half price from the poor and laboring classes. Where
do you find the losses ? In the cabins of the poor, and the profits
in the gilded palaces of the rich. Banks never pay money, never
issue money — it is always "the president &c. promise to pay" &c.
And when they make loans it is of their own indebtedness. Thus
when a man borrows ?500, they receive from him interest on what
they owe; and if any person else than a corporation owes $500, he
pays interest on what he owes. The whole order of things is
reversed in favor of these chartered monopolies, and for this
reason, I am opposed to them.

Mr. A. here read a plan which he would like to see adopted.
He said, that from a sense of right and of principle, sanctioned by
experience, he could not yield to any opinion that a well regulated
bank can exist in any community. He believed that if a general
banking system were adopted, that evils in the most incompre-
hensible numbers would follow, and throw ruin and misfortune
again on the State.

The motion to strike out all the resolutions was put and carried;
and then the motion recurred upon inserting the proposition of
Mr. ScATES.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said that it was a matter of regret
that there was not before the committee some definite proposition
which would be more comprehensive; also, it was to be regretted
that feeling had been shown in relation to a leadership. There
may be men who might aspire to leadership in this Convention,
but if there were he had not seen any of them. He had come
there to follow no leader, but an independent representative of an
independent constituency; and was willing to take all the responsi-
bility of his own acts.

I agree that the questions growing out of this subject are the
greatest that will come before the Convention. The evils of banks
have been shown by the gentlemen from Montgomery, Cook,
Jefferson and Pike. The system of banks heretofore existing in

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 273

this State is objectionable because the principles contained in it
were at war with the just and equal rights of the whole people.
The theory of all true government is, that the whole people should
enjoy equal rights — political rights. The system of banks here-
tofore, independent of all their other great evils, is objectionable,
because it confers upon them rights and privileges, not possessed
by the people in common. We have seen bankrupt corporations
and rich corporatees. How is this, and how is it with others? When
the bank fails, the members of the corporation are not affected; but
when private individuals meet with misfortune, their doors are
visited by the officers of the law. While ruin and destruction are
scattered all over the country by the operations of the bank, its
officers are revelling in the wealth gained by the banks. I object
to banks because they enjoy rights, privileges and immunities not
secured or allowed to others engaged in business. When an
opportunity for speculation occurs, these banks are given the
means of risking what is not their own, and if the speculation fails
they lose nothing. The masses are opposed to these corporations,
and are gradually wresting power from these chartered monopolies,
and step by step will reduce them to a level with other business
men. He objected to the New York system, because that con-
ferred the same unequal privileges upon a few which were denied
to the many. In the language of the resolutions offered by the
gentleman from Jefferson, the power to coin and make money has
been secured to the United States, and why? Because the power
to create a currency affects the people, enters into all their business
transactions — a power greater than even the right of government.
Give me the purse strings of a nation, and I don't care who has
the power of government; I then would be the master not only of
the people, but of their government. In view, therefore, of the
importance of this power — the sole power to regulate the currency
was reserved to the general government. In time, however, this
salutary provision was got around, and the power of regulating
the currency was conferred upon individuals in the shape of
charters, not responsible to the people. Was it the intention of
the framers of the constitution of the United States to give to
irresponsible men or soulless corporations the power to cause woe
and sorrow, or smiles and joy to the whole people? At one period

274 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of our history the banks had a circulation of $ioo,ooo,c«do, and the
transactions of the country were based upon that amount of false
capital; in one year this amount of money in the country, by the
aid of the engraver, printer and bank officer, can be increased
three-fold, and the business of the country is deranged. — Is not
the intention of the constitution to fix the value upon the currency
defeated? Those reasons, if no other, would induce him to vote
against any plan of banks. I belong to this party — the demo-
cratic— which, it appears, has occupied so much time in this
discussion. It has been said that there are those here who aspire
to lead us. I would, sir, select as my leader, if we are to have any,
from that other party which had shown so much judgment and
discretion as to keep silent, and leave this war entirely in the
hands of the "harmonious" democracy, and not from among those
who claim to be democrats, and get up here and carry on a fight
for the amusement of their opponents. — The term "harmonious
democracy" may be and is often used as a sneer, but upon the
great principle of human liberty they are harmonious; and I would
say to those who anticipate the game of the Kilkenny cats by the
democrats, that they need not lay the "flattering unction to their
soul," for that party will remember their responsibility to their
constituents. And if there is to be a bank, and if they cannot
strangle the monster in his cradle, they will unite and chain him
so that he can do no harm. If that party desired to know upon
what the democrats will unite, I tell them to select what is just
and right, and they will there find the democratic party. This
much, sir, have I said on my own responsibility.

Mr. GEDDES replied, briefly, to the remarks of the gentlemen
who had opposed banks and attributed to them such evils. He
entered into the question and argued differently.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL said, that long previous to the adoption
of the State constitution, the currency of the confederated States
had been confided to the general government, which, also, was
intrusted with the power of regulating commerce, foreign and
domestic, coin money and fix the value thereof. The States by
that constitution surrendered the power to coin money, emit bills
of credit, or to change the legal tender in payment of debts. Sore
from the evils of paper money which had been necessary during

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 275

the revolution, and the funding of which had caused so much
discontent between the speculating and substantial citizens of
the nation, any other standard of value than precious metals was
deprecated by all the patriotic of the time, who endeavored to
guard it by adequate provisions. There can be no other substi-
tute, all attempts to substitute are delusive and fraudulent, and
snares for the public prosperity. The effort to coin money out of
paper was abused. Nothing can make a promise to pay on paper,
like the dollar itself. Mr. B. (we are sorry we cannot give his
remarks more full [sic\ took the following positions:

That great commercial operations are accommodated by paper
money issues, as did the credit system, but unless convertible into
gold was worthless. Its use was like the substitution of ardent
spirits for food — it intoxicates and ruins. That the reason given
for the use of paper money — the scarcity of coin — should be the
cause of an exclusive metallic currency, because the latter was
more valuable as it become [sic] scarce. He alluded to the incon-
veniences of paper money in trade. The shocking vicissitudes of
unconvertible paper money had cost this country more than its
wars; they were the greatest difficulty in the revolution, and now
more oppressive than all the public burthens. That the issuing
of paper money by authority of acts of the legislatures of the
several States was an usurpation of power unfor[e]seen by the
framers of the constitution. The first Secretary of the Treasury,
when he introduced the conveniences of a national bank, never
contemplated that paper should supersede gold and silver as
currency. He traced the history of State banks, and admitted
that the supreme court had decided that when they were not made
a legal tender they were not unconstitutional; but that this great
power to control, value and regulate price, unfor[e]seen by the
framers of the federal constitution, has grown up one of our most
important institutions and demanded the serious attention of a
body convened to re-organize a government. This power to
create a currency was so important that no government ever
parted with its sole exercise. It controlled everything. It was
the life blood of the body politic. It was fortunate that every
laborer was familiar with the little value of these bank notes;
which the regular recurrence of periodical convulsions so clearly

276 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

demonstrated. If public sentiment advanced longer, as it has
for some time past, the deeply rooted evils of banking will soon be
alleviated, if not entirely removed. The farmers, mechanics and
others who lived by industry, and without trusting to paper
facilities, are now free from trouble, and have plenty of hard money.
Interest is moderate. They knew not the distress which was felt
where banks, credit and speculation predominated; and which
would be the case where the power was given to a few to exercise
one of the privileges of sovereignty. Fifty years ago the Bank of
England disclosed the terrible secret that banks might dispense
with hard money. Possessed of that secret our banks have
followed it up by pushing it on to a despotic supremacy. Prepos-
terous luxury, insolvency and crime are the certain followers of
the bank mania. Bad currency, speculation and monopoly can
only account for the sudden vicissitudes, the most devouring
usury, controversey [sic] and litigation, panic, clamour, convul-
sion, and at last the unlawful refusal of the banks to pay their own
notes, have been the rapid events of a few years back. He denied
the justice, right, propriety or honesty of conferring special
privileges upon any body of men. The right and original office
of a bank was to keep money, not to lend it; the principal profits of
banks proceed from what courts of justice punish as frauds, viz:
the using of trust funds. The Bank of Holland was crushed
for this.

We find that our space will not allow us to go further even with
our condensed report of Mr. B.'s able and logical speech.

Mr. SINGLETON offered an amendment to the proposition
of Mr. ScATES.

Mr. PETERS offered an amendment to the amendment.

And then the committee rose, reported progress, and had leave
to sit again. And the Convention adjourned till 3 P. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. Z. CASEY oflFered a resolution, that from to-morrow the
Convention would daily resolve into committee of the whole, and
take up the reports of the committees and dispose of the same.
Adopted.

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 ^11

The Convention then went into committee of the whole, and
took up the subject of

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison presented a long proposition
to the committee, which he said had been drawn up with a view
to meet the opinions of all those who were opposed to a prohibitory
clause. He said, that he had intended to present his views in
extensoy but it was evident, from the number of propositions that
had been introduced, that the members of the Convention had
come to some conclusion, and that all had made up their minds;
debate and argument were, therefore, unnecessary. He explained
his propositions to be as follows, ist. That there shall never be
a State bank — he was opposed to State banks — State college,
State printer. State anything. 2d. That there should be no
special charters. This, he thought, was in accordance with the
general sentiments of the people. 3d. It leaves it with the
Legislature to establish a system of banking with certain restric-
tions. He laid it down that, looking at the fast increasing popula-
tion of the State, our growing interests, &c., we must have a
paper currency, and cannot get along with an exclusive metallic
currency. Another principle of his plan, was that there shall not
be more than one bank placed in each judicial district of the State.

Mr. KITCHELL said, he had drawn up certain resolutions
containing a set of restrictions, which he could support consistently
with his view of his duty to his constituents.

It was nearly the same as had been presented by the member
from Madison, and others. Though out of order to present it, it
was not out of order to allude to it in his remarks. He supposed
he was one of those whose position was said to be an enigma, and
not consistent with democracy. He thought he knew the opinions
of the people he represented, and he felt it his duty to support
that opinion, unless it was wholly inconsistent with honesty and
propriety. This question was not regarded in his county as
settled; not one upon which public sentiment was regarded as ripe
and mature. We have and use a paper currency; not so much
specie as in other places, but the bank paper happened to be good
and the people of that part of the country think and believe that

278 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

a paper currency, when at a par, is a safe and proper medium of
circulation. They cannot recognize any argument that it is
immoral or improper to use it. They will refer you to those States
where banks have existed from the time of the formation of their
government, and ask why cannot Illinois have a good bank as well
as others. One of the first political subjects to which he had
turned his attention was the state of the people of Illinois, in
regard to the consequences of the inflation of the currency and
the ruin, havoc and disgrace which followed the suspension; and
I thought that I would take the grbund occupied by other gentle-
men, in open opposition to all banks, but I have considered better
of it. What are our county organizations but exclusive privileges
for certain purposes. Gentlemen who take the broad ground
against all privileged corporations go too far. Our county organi-
zation is but a part of the system. You cannot vote out of your
own precinct. Every college is a corporation. The arguments
of gentlemen have been directed against the abuses of banking.
As well might they take ground against steamboats, that they
should not be permitted to navigate your rivers because they
contain such engines of destruction. As well prohibit physicians
practising because quacks have dealt out death and destruction
in the land. You may as well say there shall be no religion
because, at some time or another, it has been united to State, and
has oppressed the people. He thought this a fair statement of the
arguments, and that it was not extravagant to compare their
arguments against the abuses of banking with the steamboat
dangers. He was opposed to the system of banking heretofore
carried on in this State, but thought that we might adopt some
system; it was impossible to exclude bank notes from circulation
in this State. There are now laws upon the statute book of this
State, which are as a dead letter. They cannot be enforced, and
it would have been better that they had not been enacted than
not in force. When it can be shown that it is a curse upon the
State that we ever had bank notes, or that we can exclude them
from circulation, then I will abandon the position I have taken,
and go for their exclusion. It had been said that bank notes were
an unfair representation of the amount of money in the country,
that it was immoral and impolitic to use it as a currency. The

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 279

argument is that it is a paper currency, that the corporations are
enjoying the privilege of issuing seven or eight dollars in notes to
one in capital — in specie. These things are an abuse of the privi-
lege, and are privileges which should not be granted. Heretofore
it has been so provided that in case of a failure nothing but the
corporate property could be touched, though it might be that the
officers, directors, and stockholders were immensely rich, nothing
of their private wealth was liable. But we came here to adopt a
different order of things; we came here to lay down an organic law
for the land, and questions of a doubtful character, of expediency
and policy, and one which has been decided differently in every
other State of the Union, should not be put in the constitution of
the State and become the unalterable law of the land. He was
not in favor of any particular system of banks, there might be
banks required by the people. And suppose the people of Chicago,
or of Quincy, or of Springfield desire a bank of deposite, of
which no one could complain, the prohibitory clause would prevent
it. He was opposed to any prohibitory clause in the constitution.
Mr. K. here read his plan, which was a mere statement of restric-
tions to be placed upon banks, and applicable to any and every
system. He said he was not, as he had said before, in favor
of any particular system, but he was satisfied that the people of
his part of the country were opposed to any unqualified prohibitory
clause being inserted in that constitution, and he felt himself
bound to carry out their views and sentiments. While I am not in
favor of any particular system of banking, I know that it is im-
possible to exclude from circulation in this State the bank notes
of New York, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, and other States, so
long as they are at par, and answer all purposes of business, and
that all our efforts to do so will be in vain. He thanked the
Convention for their attention and hoped he had defined his
position sufficiently explicitly.

Mr. BROCKMAN addressed the Convention for a consider-
able time in favor of a prohibitory clause and against banks of
every description. A full report of his speech has been taken and
will be given in another form.

Mr. DEMENT said, that as the day was nearly spent he
would not take up much of the time of the Convention, but would

28o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

merely define his position in as few remarks as possible, and throw
out a few of the suggestions which had occurred to his mind on
the question now before them. He was aware that it was the
belief of many there, that the question of banks was the all ab-
sorbing question of the day, not only in the Convention, but
amongst the people, in all sections of the State of Illinois. This
would be the impression forced upon the mind of anyone who had
heard the discussion on that floor, yet such was not the case
among the people. This question of a bank was not considered
by the people of his county before he came there — banks were
considered by them to be an obsolete idea. It was said there by
the whigs that the former State banks, which had brought upon
them so much ruin and misfortune, had been created by the demo-
crats, and they, the whigs, threw them off as no part of their
policy; the democrats threw them off, and the whole people, with-
out distinction of party, admitted them to be an obsolete idea.
All were opposed to them where he came from, and the question
was not alluded to in the canvass except, perhaps, to ask a candi-
date if he was opposed to them, which he answered in the affirm-
ative, and this was all that was said. But if a person were to hear
the discussion here, he would think that the people were alive on
this subject. It was but a few years ago that this question of
banks was a party question, the democrats were opposed to all
banks and the whig party was in favor of them, but as has been
shown by the gentleman who has just taken his seat (Mr. Brock-
man) the whigs have receded in this as in many other things, so
much so that there is no whig in our part of the State who will
pretend to favor them. And now it is said that it is no political
question; but becomes with us one of mere expediency — except in
regard to a bank with special privileges. The evils of banking he
considered consist more in the embodiment, in one corporation of
a few men, of peculiar and special privileges, and the cutting off
all competition, in the way of trade and business, by men who are
not possessed of those rights and privileges which give their char-
tered opponents so great an advantage. The evil, therefore, is in
the sespecial privileges which they have enjoyed, and the want of
proper and necessary restrictions upon them. On this question
of expediency, he would say that he was opposed to the creation of

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 281

any bank with power to issue any bill of credit, promissory note,
or anything else intended as a currency; and he was opposed to
any corporation issuing three or four dollars in paper to each one
of their capital. He thought that Illinois did not need any banks
to enrich her people or to raise the value of her property. He
considered that the country was only enriched as we improve our
resources by the increase of our products, or as we raise means of
subsistence by labor. Nor did he think there was at present any
surplus capital in Illinois to be vested in banks, and that if any
banks were now to be created it would be embraced by men more
anxious to borrow than by those who desire to invest their surplus
capital. There is no excitement anywhere on this question of
banks except in this Convention, and, so far as my information
extends, it did not enter into the canvass. This was the case in
the northern part of the State. A few years ago the people of the
State were depressed and in debt, and all kinds of property was
of little value. Now our property has become enhanced, and we
are now in a state of comparative prosperity; these good results
had been produced without banks. Every farmer, mechanic and
artisan, and all others whose avocations tended to contribute to
the wealth of the country, have together produced this prosperity.
But there were those in the community who had been laying on
their oars watching' for their opportunity, now come forth, and
taking advantage of that ambition, which prosperity always
creates in the bosom of men, are desirous to have banks, and a
fictitious currency wherewith to run into wild and extravagant
schemes of speculation, and in due course of time will possess
themselves of all the property of the country, and in due course of
time their bubble will burst, and in the scramble will take care to
enrich themselves on the loss and substance of others. The
people of Illinois do not want these banks. It is true they exist
in New York and other States, but he believed that if the people
of that State were like us, once rid of them, they would never
have them again; but such is the influence on the trade and busi-
ness of the community, and the power they are enabled to exercise
over the people themselves, by means of their privileges, that
once fastened upon a community it is impossible to get rid of them.
Illinois is now without them, and I believe that gold and silver.

282 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

like water, will always find its level, but paper money will always
drive gold and silver from the market. One part of the State has
now an exclusive metallic currency of gold and silver; this is in
the northern part of the State, in the mining region. There was
at one time nothing but paper circulated there, and so great was
the confidence of the people that a note was never examined but
taken without hesitation. After a while the banks burst, and
these people felt the loss more severely than others who had less
of that kind of currency. They then declared and resolved for
the future to have nothing but gold and silver.

There English sovereigns constituted nearly the whole currency,
because they were worth more there than anywhere else; they
passed current in that region for ^4.90, while at the east the[y]
were taken for only I4.83, and at St. Louis for I4.85; the
difference, therefore, between the ^4.90 and ^4.83 paid well
for the exchange between that quarter and the eastern cities.
The difference in the value was far greater than the cost of trans-
portation. Gold and silver must find its level, and though in
other States they may have banks and paper money. State lines
are no barriers to the exportation of the precious metals, which
will naturally flow where it is worth most. Our produce will go
eastward, and their gold must flow back to us, and one will be
the exchange for the other. Suppose we send three millions of
dollars worth of our produce — beef, corn, flour, pork, lead — to the
east, it is not necessary that that amount in specie shall be returned
at once, because as our producers have the coin, which is paid by
them to the merchants, and those merchants trade for their goods
at the east. What is more easy and simple for the manufacturers
or purchasers of our produce there to pay for it in drafts upon our
own merchants, and thus the money is again paid out to the farmer
and the miner in metallic currency; and all this can be done without
banks. Where is the necessity for them in our State?

I oppose the proposition of the gentleman from Madison, even
if we are to have banks. One objection is, that it does not provide
that the directors and stockholders of the banks shall be personally
liable for the debts of the institution. Here is no remedy against
men setting apart a certain amount of their money to bank upon,
and when that is lost, with thousands belonging to others, sitting

TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1847 283

down with a private fortune exempt from all liability, and which
may have been the accumulated result of accommodation in the
shape of loans to him by the bank. I also object to it because it
does not provide that any bill which may pass the Legislature,
creating a bank, shall be submitted to the people. In conclusion,
I will say to those fifty-eight who voted for the prohibitory clause
that we want but twenty-three more to make a majority; and I
say that, in case of a failure to carry that, I believe there are those
here who are opposed to banks yet opposed to a prohibitory
clause, and who come nearer us than others, and with whom the
fifty-eight may vote; that there is a probability that they may
unite with us on some plan which will, in effect, accomplish the
ends of a prohibitory clause. If I can't get a total prohibition, I
hope to see something adopted that will approach it as near as
possible. I had no expectation that what I have said will have
any effect upon members here. I anticipate no such results from
my speaking, but I have thrown out these suggestions to those in
the Convention who approach nearer the doctrine of the fifty-
eight in principle, and who, I believe, may unite with us upon
something.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell addressed the Convention in
deprecation of the introduction of party topics, and in defence of
the whig party.

The Convention then adjourned till to-morrow at 9 a. m.

XX. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30, 1847

Mr. BUNSEN offered a resolution of inquiry. Referred to
the committee on Education.

Mr. SIMPSON, from the committee on Counties, made a
report; which, after some explanations, was withdrawn.

Mr. WILLIAMS presented a resolution of inquiry. Referred
to the committee on Counties.

Mr. SINGLETON offered an amendment; and after a short
debate, the amendment was laid on the table and the resolution
adopted.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved that the committee of the whole be
discharged from the further consideration of the bank question —
and a reference of the whole subject to the committee on Incorpora-
tions; as it was evident that after that committee shall report the
whole subject will be again discussed. Carried.

Messrs. Kitchell and Archer presented propositions in
relation to banks; which were referred to the committee on
Incorporations.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the Convention go into committee of
the whole and take up reports of committees as per order adopted
yesterday. Carried.

The Convention then went into committee of the whole,
Mr. Woodson in the chair.

Mr. CASEY said, that he wished to suggest that the chairman of
the committee on the Legislative Department and the chairman
of the committee on the Executive Department were both absent
from the city; but they had requested that the reports may not be
postponed on account of their absence. He moved the report of
the committee on the Legislative Department be taken up.
Carried.

The committee then proceeded to consider the report of the
proposed articles of the constitution contained in that report:
The first section was read —

"That the General Assembly of this State shall consist of a
284

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30, 1847 285

Senate and House of Representatives; both to be elected by the
people."

Mr. CALDWELL moved to strike out the words "Senate and"
and "both;" which motion was lost.

Second section. "That the members of the General Assembly
shall be elected once in every two years, &c."

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to strike out "two" and insert
"three."

Mr. ROUNTREE moved to insert "four."

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery advocated the adoption of the
last number. He said the opinion of the people of the counties
he represented — Bond and Montgomery — had been fully expressed
upon this subject. They were satisfied that we had been cursed
by too much legislation. He thought that one session every four
years, with power to the Governor to call them together when
any emergency arose, was sufficient for all the legislation the
people required. The people there, and even the members of the
Legislature, would be able to know what laws were passed by one
Legislature before the next met; which is not the case at the present.

Mr. DALE begged leave to differ from his friend of Mont-
gomery, as to the views of the people of Bond county. True, as
the gentleman said, the people of his county do complain of there
being too much legislation and wish a remedy against over-legis-
lation. But not the remedy of electing members for four years, as
proposed by the gentleman.

They complain of over-legislation and the expenses attending
it. The remedy for this, and it is the one which they wish, is
fully furnished in the report of this committee. This report
limits the time of holding sessions, so that, instead of ninety days,
as heretofore, the Legislature will be able, in future, to remain in
session but little over forty-two days, and too, at a pay so small
as to remedy all the objections that the people of his county have
against over-legislation and its heavy expenses.

This reduced pay and the short time allowed for legislation
will induce the Legislature to enter immediately upon the business
of legislation, and to legislate only on matters called for and
necessary to be legislated on. And this is the reform which the
people of his county desired.

286 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. GEDDES was in favor of the four years. — He thought
that we had had too much legislation, and that it would have
been much better for Illinois if there had been no Legislature for
the last twelve years.

Mr. HAYES said, that it might be assumed, from the remarks
of gentlemen, that Legislatures had become nuisances, which,
though not the term used, was no stronger than some that were
uttered by gentlemen. He admitted that there had been bad
legislation, but was there not bad legislation in every State? If
they so much feared bad legislation, would it not be as well to
abolish the Legislature altogether? The gentleman had said that
it would have been better had there been no Legislature for the
last twelve years. Perhaps we might have avoided some of the
evils of bad legislation, but would it not have been depriving the
people of their share in the government? If he had understood
anything of the nature of government, the whole conservative
power of the people was in the Legislature — there they were heard,
there they spoke in the administration of the government. They ■
had a latent power in themselves to overturn the government, and
establish law and order where law and order did not exist before.
But the only legal power the people had was vested in the Legis-
lature. Much had been said about bad legislation, and that it
had been conducted by men who acted not to promote the purposes
of the people, but rather to advance their own. Here we have a
large State with a large annual revenue coming into the hands of
your Auditor and Treasurer, and unless we have a Legislature, the
Governor will have millions under his control; and there is no
power to direct the disposition of it.

He denied the benefits of a long interval between the sessions
of the Legislature. It was not tobe expected that our public serv-
ants will always be pure. That was a presumption in favor of
human character. But if they had had bad legislators, we may
have a corrupt executive, and the government exercised with
tyranny. Many people in th[e] State thought two years too
long. He thought the Convention, in carrying out reform,
might go too far, and might defeat their action by attempting to
do too much.

Mr. KNAPP of Scott inquired whether the long interval of

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30, 1847 287

four years might not affect the election of United States Senators.

Mr. SHUMWAY said, the difficulty of the accumulation of
the revenue was easily answered by saying, the Legislature can
as well distribute at its session the revenue for four years as it
could do for two.

Mr. LOGAN endorsed the views of the gentleman from White
(Mr. Hayes.) Though no democrat, he would oppose, as our
government was mixed, the executive, judiciary, and legislative
or democratic departments, the abridging of the democratic part.
The Auditor of Public Accounts and the Treasurer, who had large
sums coming into their hands, are not responsible to any but the
Legislature. Again, in case the Governor becomes corrupt, what
good was the power he possessed to call the Legislature together?
He would not call them to revise his acts, and we would have but
one session of the Legislature during the term of the Governor.
He opposed it further, because it was putting it out of the power
of the people to be heard more than once in four years, while the
other parts of the government went on administering it.

Mr. BOND was in favor of striking out, and inserting four
years. He differed from the gentlemen from Sangamon and
White, because when this Convention had done with clipping the
powers of our executive, his duty will be but little more than to
see the laws executed. The Governor, even at the present, has
no power to draw money from the treasury, except when author-
ized by the Legislature. The only difficulty was the election of
United States Senators, and he supposed they would have to
elect them four years before.

Mr. LOGAN. They may die or resign.

Mr. BOND. They but seldom die and never resign.

Mr. MINSHALL advocated a shorter term of interval,
because he thought the representative should be responsible to
the people at short periods. If we adopt the term of four years,
each man elected a Senator would hold the office for eight years.

Mr. Palmer of Macoupin and Mr. Davis of Montgomery
continued the debate, the former in opposition to, and the latter
in favor of, the amendment.

On motion the committee rose and asked leave to sit again;
which was granted.

288 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. SCATES presented an invitation from the Sabbath Day
Convention, to the Convention to attend its sittings.

The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention an invitation
from the citizens of Springfield to attend the barbacue to be given
to the volunteers returned from Mexico, on Saturday, July 3d.

On motion, both invitations were extended.

On motion, Messrs. Eccles, Edmonson, Constable and
Archer were excused for ten days.

Mr. Edmonson was excused from longer serving on the com-
mittee on Incorporations.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till to-morrow
at 9 A. M.

XXI. THURSDAY, JULY i, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Barger.

Mr. HOES presented a petition from a number of citizens of
Livingston county in favor of a superintendant [sic] of common
schools. Referred to the committee on Education.

Mr. MANLY moved to take up certain petitions, presented
by him some weeks ago, and refer them to the committee on Law
Reform. Carried.

Mr. WHITESIDE, from the committee on Military Affairs,
to which had been referred the 5th article of the constitution,
reported the same back, with a recommendation that it be adopted
without amendment. The report and the article were referred
to the committee of the whole.

Mr. THOMAS, from the committee on the Revenue, reported
back a resolution recommending the appropriation of the taxes
of the i6th section in each township to school purposes, and asked
to be discharged from its further consideration. Report concurred
in.

Mr. HAYES, from the committee on Law Reform, reported
back a resolution in relation to excusing certain persons having
conscientious scruples, from serving on juries, &c., and asked to
be discharged from the further consideration of the same. Con-
curred in.

Mr. KITCHELL asked leave of absence for seven days for
Dr. TuTT. Granted.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess gave notice that on next
Monday week he would introduce the following propositions:

Resolved, That the committee on Incorporations be instructed
to report the following propositions, to be submitted to the people
separately, viz:

First. There shall be no bank or banks, nor any branch of

any bank or banks, of any description whatever established in

this State, for the term of ten years. If a majority of all the votes

cast by the qualified electors of this State, shall be in favor of such

289

290 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

clause being inserted in the constitution, it shall then be made
the duty of the Legislature, at the expiration of said term of ten
years, to submit the same question to the people, to be voted on
in the same manner; and it shall be the further duty of the Legis-
lature to submit the same question every ten years thereafter,
unless said proposition shall be rejected, then and in that case said
clause shall be stricken from the constitution.

Second. If a majority of the qualified electors of the State
shall decide against the foregoing proposition being made a part
of the constitution, then it shall be made the duty of the Legis-
lature, if at any time it shall be deemed necessary, to create by
law any bank or banks, or to establish within the limits of this
State any branches of any bank or banks of any other States, to
submit any and every such law, so creating or establishing any
such banks or branches, to the people for their approval, at least
one year previous to the time fixed for voting on the same; and in
case said law shall receive a majority of all the votes given at said
election, then it shall be in full force and operation, otherwise to
be of no force or effect whatever.

Mr. KNOWLTON offered a resolution directing an inquiry
by the committee on Education. Carried.

Mr. HAWLEY offered a resolution, that a special committee
be appointed to report some provision for the amelioration of
lunatic, deaf, dumb and blind persons.

Mr. HARDING moved to add the word "black;" which
amendment was laid on the table.

Mr. SCATES moved to add "insane."

Mr. HARDING suggested that, as the Convention were
determined to do nothing for the negroes, he thought it had better
insert the word "white" before lunatics, &c., for if left as it now
was it would be applicable to all colors.

Mr. SCATES replied that, in cases of humanity he knew no
difference in color.

Mr. ADAMS moved to lay the whole subject on the table.
Carried.

Mr. WEAD offered a resolution, that the committee on
Miscellaneous^Subjects be directed to inquire into the expediency

THURSDAY, JULY i, 1847 291

of providing for fixing the seat of government of the State at
Peoria. Laid on the table.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery offered a resolution that the
committee on Incorporations be instructed to report a clause
prohibiting a State Bank. Carried.

Mr. HOGUE moved to go into committee of the whole.
Decided in the affirmative.

And the Convention resolved itself into committee of the
whole, Mr. Woodson in the chair, and took up the report of the
committee on the Legislative Department.

The question pending was on striking out "two" and inserting
"four" in the second line, and the vote being taken the committee
refused to strike out.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to amend the same section by
striking out the words "first Monday in October" (the day
provided for the election of members of the Legislature) and insert
"first Monday in November."

Mr. HENDERSON moved to insert the "Tuesday after the
first Monday in November."

The vote being taken, the word October was stricken out.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to fill with "first Monday in August."

Mr. SINGLETON moved to fill the blank with "3d Monday
in August."

A conversational debate ensued, in which Messrs. Whitney,
Davis of Montgomery, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Henderson,
Knox, Harvey, Churchill, Scates, Geddes, Logan, Peters,
Anderson, Whiteside, Knowlton and Atherton participated-
And the question being taken on inserting the "first Monday in
November," it was decided in the affirmative — yeas 86, nays not
counted.

Mr. ROUNTREE moved to add "and continue for ten days"
after the word eight in 2d line, and at the end of the section, to
provide that the elections shall continue for two days."

He said that if all our elections, for General Assembly,
Presidential elections, and county officers, are to be held on one
day, and by the viva voce system, it would be impossible to get
through in one day. If we, however, adopt the ballot system, his

292 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

proposition would be unnecessary. The question was taken on
the amendment and decided in the negative.

Mr. SHARPE moved to strike out "eight" and insert "nine"
in 2d line — that the first elections shall be in 1849. Lost.

Mr. ROBBINS moved to insert in 4th line — "and for such
length of time," so as to have the elections continue for a time to
be fixed by law. Lost.

QUALIFICATIONS OF REPRESENTATIVES

The next section was then read and

Mr. MARSHALL moved to strike out "inhabitant of this
State," as unnecessary. Lost.

Mr. CAMPBELL moved to strike out "five" after "twenty"
in first line, and insert "one" (in the age of the Representatives,)
which motion was lost.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to insert after the word resided—
"five years in the State and" so that no person should be a member
unless a resident of the State five years and of the county one year.
Lost.

QUALIFICATIONS OF SENATORS

Mr. DAWSON moved to strike out "thirty" before "years"
in the first line (the proposed longest age for Senators,) and insert
"forty."

Mr. WHITNEY opposed any such amendment; and the
question was taken on the motion and it was lost.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to insert "and an inhabitant of this
State," after the words "shall be a citizen of the United States."
Carried.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to insert after the words "shall
have resided" the words "five years in this State." Carried — yeas
70, nays 56.

Mr. HAY moved to amend so as the age should be 36 years
instead of 30. Yeas 52, nays not counted. Lost.

Sec. 5. ALLOTMENTS OF SENATORS

This section was passed without any amendment.

THURSDAY, JULY i, 1847 293

Sec. 6. number of senators 'and representatives

The section reads — "The Senate shall consist of twenty-five
members, and the House of Representatives shall consist of
seventy-five members, never to be increased or diminished, to be
apportioned among the several counties as herein provided for;
and until there shall be a new apportionment of Senators and
Representatives, the State shall be divided into senatorial and
representative districts, and the Senators and Representatives
shall be apportioned as follows:"

Mr. HARVEY moved to insert after the word "diminished,"
"until the Legislature shall deem it necessary." Lost.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out "five" after "seventy."
Yeas 40. Lost.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out "five" after "twenty."
Lost.

Mr. HARDING moved to strike out "seventy-five members,
never to be increased nor diminished" and insert "one member
from each county in the State at the time of the election."

[Mr. HARDING said, that the committee having decided that
the legislature should consist of two branches, and that it should
convene once in two years, it was necessary in fixing the number
of which that legislature should be comprised, to have some refer-
ence to the decision of the committee in regard to those points to
which he had alluded. — Had the committee determined to strike
out from the first section "the Senate," as proposed by the gentle-
man from Gallatin, then it was probable, that the committee
would also be prepared to strike out the number seventy-five, and
insert a much larger number; but it was determined by a vote of
the committee, without debate, that there should be a Senate as
well as a House of Representatives in the legislative department
of the government, and although he had voted against the propo-
sition of the gentleman to strike out the Senate, from the alarm
which he felt at this attempt at innovation upon the mode of
organization adopted in other governments, more than from con-
clusions founded upon considerations of necessity and principle;
yet why, he would ask, should we retain the form of a republican

294 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

government, unless we might have the substance and excellence
which ought to appertain to such a government? Why incur the
many inconveniences, and the expenses necessarily incident to
such a form of government, unless the benefits which ought to be
derived therefrom could be secured. If the members of the two
branches of the legislature were to possess like qualifications, to be
vested with like powers on all subjects of legislation, to be elected
upon precisely the same basis of population, by the same electors,
in the same manner, and for the same term, why should they be
divided into two branches? It was not enough to be told that
one branch was intended to be a check upon the other, unless by
their different characters and constituency this desirable result
was to be secured.

Despotism, continued Mr. Harding, acts upon and oppresses
mankind in different forms; sometimes in a military garb, but
more frequently in an executive power, and I think that reason
and experience demonstrate that it may, and that it has often
assumed a legislative shape. An unchecked and unrestrained
legislature, concurring as they generally do in our times, with the
executive, because of like constituency, and like party character,
must prove dangerous to liberty, and for want of being properly
balanced, render the government unstable. I admit, Sfr, that by
the division of the legislative department into two branches, those
branches may have a tendency to check the action of each other;
but. Sir, that tendency is as chaff before the wind, when they are
all elected upon the same basis of representation, and two of them
according to the same apportionment. All are the offspring of
the throes and labors of party strife and passion. This legislature
is to be clothed with all the sovereign powers of the State, governed
only by the restrictions of this constitution. What interest, sir,
important though it may be, unless it can wield many votes, is
safe in a government of this character? Private right and cor-
porate right may be safe so long as shielded by an enlightened and
independent judiciary. But, sir, how long can we hope that the
judiciary under the proposed mode of its creation, shall withstand
the sway of unscrupulous and eager party. The constitution
itself. Sir, before the united flood of these streams may be over-
whelmed. May not some of the able statesmen of this conven-

THURSDAY, JULY i, 1847 295

tion bring forward and insert in this place, or in some other portion
of this article, a provision which will in practice, to a greater ex-
tent than this section proposes, give a House and a Senate dissim-
ilar in character? I do not desire to make any such distinctions
as we find in the British Parliament; but, sir, I do believe that we
ought at least to imitate the mode of apportionment which pre-
vails in regard to the two branches of Congress. The conserva-
tive principle is not always in the possession of the kw, either
among the people or in legislatures. The most radical, unsteady,
unscrupulous and violent are often in the minority; and, Sir, when
they come to possess a majority, then if unchecked by a proper
organization of the departments of government, the rights, the
property and the persons of those who are obnoxious to them
must yield to the irresistible force of the torrent.

When this subject was before the Convention in the form of
resolutions of instruction to the committee on the Legislative De-
partment, I opposed this number by my vote. I proposed that
the number of members in the house should correspond with the
number of counties; and that each county should elect a represent-
ative, and that they should be paid out of the treasury of their
respective counties. This, sir, although it would save more
money to the State treasury than any other plan, was voted down;
it was defeated through the superior address and ability of the
gentleman from White.

But, sir, there is another consideration, and I much regret my
inability to do more than refer to it. Could I enforce it with the
arguments with which it is fraught, then, sir, I should hope to see
this mode adopted; and there is no doubt that it would aid much
in preserving the faith and stability of the government of this
State, and it is this: — The tillers of the soil, under such an appor-
tionment, would control in a great degree one branch of the legis-
lature. The men who bear the burthen of taxation, upon whose
broad acres rest the debts and expenses of the State, must feel the
necessity, if they would be relieved of this incubus of debt, of
checking extravagant legislation, of adopting a system of strict
economy in regard to all the expenses of the government. A
representation by counties in one branch of the legislature, would
be by no means so unequal, in respect to this interest, as gentle-

296 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

men may at first suppose. It would tend to produce stability,
because, sir, a large portion of these counties, although small in
population compared with those in which are situated places of
depot and entrepot, where the bands of the loom and the spindle
congregate, are settled by the farmer and mechanic, whose steady
habits and principles would not be so readily overwhelmed by the
unsettled, speculative and often unprincipled population along
the public works and in your large cities. Is it too much to ask,
sir, that this vital, and in Illinois, most important interest should
in this slight degree be favored? Sir, had this unassuming, un-
obtrusive, virtuous and patriotic portion of the population — this
bone and sinew of the State — been more frequently consulted, had
it been allowed to exert greater influence, and the busy-bodies of
towns and cities less, well would it be now and hereafter for this State.

Gentlemen have often on this floor declared what were the
complaints and wishes of the people. Sir, have not all the mem-
bers of this Convention repeatedly heard the voice of the people,
justly lamenting that the country was too much influenced by
party, and do we not know that unchecked, unrestrained, faulty
action has hurried the country into numerous acts of legislation
which are deeply to be regretted? The representation in one
branch, by counties, will check the headlong course of party.
For, sir, although there may be a party governor, and a
party majority in the Senate, yet it requires a majority
of counties to give free scope to party bias on the part of
the other two branches. Would you have the representative
faithful to his trust? Then pay him out of the treasury of the
county which he represents. Does he linger too long at the Capi-
tol? The accounts at the county treasury will show his delin-
quency, and thus another tie is established between the member
and his constituency. Another advantage which will arise from
allowing each county to elect a member is, that it will save much
clamor and much expense in making apportionments hereafter.
Make this the basis of representation, and we shall hear no more
complaints of apportionments being made with reference to party
interests and party objects. This will give us a stable govern-
ment.]2'

"This speech by Harding is taken from the Sangamo Journal, July 8.

THURSDAY, JULY i, 1847 297

After some words in favor of the amendment by Messrs.
Harding and McCallen, and by Messrs. Scates and Davis in
opposition; the committee rose, reported, had leave to sit again,
and the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

afternoon

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the Convention resolve itself into
committee of the whole. Carried.

The question pending when the committee rose was on the
amendment of the member from Warren; and being taken, was
decided in the negative.

Mr. HARVEY moved to insert "by the Legislature" before
the words "the State shall be" &c. Lost.

Mr. CHURCH moved to insert after "diminished," the words
"until after the year i860."

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau offered as a substitute for the
amendment "until after the year i860, or till the payment of the
interest on the State debt shall be secured, and the Senate shall
never exceed 33 members nor the House 100 members."

Messrs. Kinney and Mason supported, briefly, the substitute,
which on a division was lost.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin offered as a substitute "until the
population of the State shall amount to one million of souls, and
the House shall never exceed one hundred members." Yeas 76,
nays 54.

Mr. SERVANT moved to amend the substitute as adopted,
by striking out "one million" and inserting "two millions."
Yeas 63, nays 58.

Mr. THOMAS moved to add to the substitute "such increase
shall not exceed five members at any one apportionment."

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to lay the amend-
ments on the table.

Mr. THOMAS raised a point of order, whether the committee
had technically any table, and whether such a motion was in order.
The chairman, after a consultation with the President, decided
the motion in order; whereupon ensued a debate between Messrs.
Logan, Thomas, Edwards of S., Cloud, Casey and others, after

298 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

which the chair withdrew his decision and ruled the motion out of
order.

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough said, that if they had no table
to lay such amendments on, he hoped the Convention would buy
one at once.

The amendment was then lost. Yeas 58, nays 59.

Mr. LAUGHLIN moved to amend the substitute by making
it read "until the year i860 when the Legislature may increase
the House to one hundred members." Lost. Yeas 49, nays 66.

Mr. DEITZ submitted the following as a substitute for the
substitute: — "until i860, when the Legislature may increase five
members and the same number every five years thereafter, till the
House shall reach one hundred in number."

Mr. SINGLETON moved the committee rise. Lost.

The question, after a brief debate, was taken on the last pro-
posed substitute, and it was carried. Yeas 71, nays 57.

The amendment as amended was then adopted. Yeas 66,
nays Si-
Mr. WHITNEY moved the committee rise. Carried. The
chairman reported and it had leave to sit again.

Mr. SHARPE asked leave of absence, for six days, for Dr.
Choate, of Hancock county. Granted.

Mr. SINGLETON asked leave of absence for Mr. Marshall
of Mason for five days. Granted.

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough offered a resolution that no
member shall receive pay for time not given to the Convention,
except when absent on account of sickness.

Mr. THOMAS moved to lay it on the table. The yeas and
nays were demanded and ordered, and then the motion to lay on
the table was withdrawn.

Mr. SCATES renewed it, and the question being taken, on
laying the resolution on the table by yeas and nays resulted —
yeas 49, nays 91.

The use of the Hall was given to Mrs. Browne and daughters,
for a concert to be given on Saturday night to the returned
volunteers. And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till
to-morrow at 9 a. m.

XXII. FRIDAY, JULY 2, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bailey.

Mr. SCATES moved that leave of absence be granted to
Mr. Canady, for six days. Granted.

Mr. KNOWLTON asked leave of absence of four days for
Mr. Lander. Granted.

The resolution pending at the adjournment yesterday, was on
the resolution, as amended, of Mr. Campbell of Jo Daviess, and

Mr. GEDDES offered a substitute for the resolution, and the
vote being taken thereon, resulted — yeas 67, nays 20; no quorum.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved a call of the House. Ordered.

The call was then made and 130 members answered to their
names. On motion, further proceedings under the call were
dispensed with.

And the substitute was laid on the table.

Mr. BUTLER offered the following as a substitute for the
resolution:

That each member of this Convention give in the number of
days of his attendance upon honor, including the number of days
he has been absent on leave, and on account of sickness, and those
he has actually attended in this Convention, and the same be
certified to by the President.

Mr. WHITNEY moved to lay the whole subject on the table;
on which motion the yeas and nays were ordered and resulted —
yeas 59, nays 70.

Mr. CAMPBELL then accepted the substitute.

Mr. SINGLETON offered an amendment — "that each member
give in the number of days for which he is entitled to pay and the
President certify to the same.

Mr. KNOWLTON offered as an amendment, that when any

member shall be absent at prayers, he shall be docked in his per

diem 25 cents; at the reading of the journal, 10 cents; at the time

of making a speech by any member, two dollars; at the offering of

299

300 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

any resolution, thirty-seven and a half cents; and at the calling of
the yeas and nays, five dollars.

On motion, the previous question was ordered, and the vote
being taken on the last amendment by yeas and nays, resulted —
yeas 19. Lost.

Mr. WORCESTER moved that the Convention adjourn till
Tuesday morning. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the
motion was withdrawn.

A motion was made that the Convention adjourn till Monday
next; and the yeas and nays being ordered and taken, resulted —
yeas 8, nays 122. The question was taken on the amendment of
Mr. Singleton, and decided in the negative.

And the question being taken on the resolution as amended,
by yeas and nays, it was decided in the affirmative.

Mr. BUTLER offered the following preamble and resolution:

Whereas, incorporations, clothed with exclusive powers and
privileges, are contrary to the spirit and fundamental principles of
our republican institutions; oppressive to the best interests of the
people at large; and tend to unequal, unjust and oppressive monop-
olies; making the rich richer, and the poor poorer; and whereas, by
such monopolies and exclusive privileges, the capitalist is enabled
to control the particular branch of business in which he may engage,
and conduct the same to the exclusion of the truly worthy and
deserving; making wealth predominate over merit, virtue and
integrity; and whereas, the chartering by law and protecting in-
corporations in the exercise of such exclusive, unequal and unjust
power and privileges, tends to the concentration of capital and the
business of the country in the hands of the few, and to the estab-
lishment of an aristocracy of wealth, and to the subjection of the
many to mere dependents and servile operators; therefore.

Resolved, That the committee on Incorporations be instructed
to enquire &c. of prohibiting the Legislature from hereafter creat-
ing any companies, associations or corporations — by special act,
with exclusive powers and privileges, except for municipal purposes,
and except in such cases where the objects of such association,
company or corporation cannot be accomplished under the provi-
sions of a general law which may apply equally to all persons.

Mr. LOGAN said, he had no objection to the resolution, as it

FRIDAY, JULY 2, 1847 301

was one directing a mere enquiry; but the preamble contained
certain principles which he did not think the Convention would
adopt. He asked a division of the question. And the vote was
taken on the adoption of the resolution, and it was adopted.

Mr. McCALLEN then moved that the preamble be laid on
the table. The yeas and nays were demanded, and were ordered,
and resulted yeas 64, nays 67.

Mr. LOGAN said, it was evident John Thompson had been
hunting up his stray cattle and had been successful; and as this
question would lead to debate he moved its postponement till
Monday week, when the resolutions of the gentleman from Jo
Daviess would come before the Convention. Carried.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved a resolution instructing the committee
on Incorporations to report a clause prohibiting the establishment
of a United States bank or any branch thereof in the State.

Mr. SINGLETON offered as a substitute for the resolution
that no member of the Convention be allowed for his own use, any
of the paper or ink furnished by the State; and that no member
be allowed pay for fractions of day's attendance.

Mr. VANCE moved to adjourn till 3 p. m.

Mr. ATHERTON moved to adjourn till Monday week.

Mr. BROWN moved to adjourn till Tuesday next.

The motion to adjourn till Monday week was lost.

The motion to adjourn till Tuesday next was decided by yeas
and nays as follows: Yeas 4, nays 128.

Mr. BROWN moved to adjourn till Monday, and the vote was
taken by yeas and nays, as follows: Yeas 7, nays 121.

The motion to adjourn till 3 p. m., was lost.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell made a few remarks on the state
of things in the Convention, and

Mr. SINGLETON withdrew his substitute.

Mr. DEITZ moved to add to the resolution, "without first
obtaining leave of the Legislature."

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to lay the amendment on the table.
Carried. The resolution was then postponed till Monday week
next.

Mr. SINGLETON then offered his resolution, (same one as
before withdrawn.)

302 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. LOGAN moved to lay it on the table. The yeas and nays
were demanded, ordered and taken, and resulted — yeas 76, nays 50.

Mr. HILL offered a resolution that the Convention shall meet
daily hereafter (Sundays excepted) at 8 a. m., and 2 p. m.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess offered as an amendment
that, in computing the pay of members for attendance, Sundays
be not included. A motion to lay the amendment on the table
was made, and the yeas and nays demanded and ordered.

Mr. GEDDES moved the Convention adjourn till 3 p. m.

The yeas and nays on the motion were taken, and resulted —
yeas 56, nays 69.

Mr. HAYES moved to adjourn till 2 p. m. Lost.

The yeas and nays were then taken on laying the amendment
on the table, and resulted — yeas 62, nays 46.

Mr. SERVANT offered a resolution that when this Convention
adjourn, it adjourn till Monday next.

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to lay the resolution
on the table, till 3 p. m. Yeas 80. Carried.

Mr. LAUGHLIN moved the Convention adjourn till 3 p. m.
Carried.

AFTERNOON

Mr. GEDDES moved to take up the resolution to adjourn till
Monday. Carried. Yeas 77, nays none. And it was adopted.

Mr. THOMAS moved the Convention adjourn. Lost.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved the use of the Hall be
granted to Mrs. Browne and daughters on Saturday night for a
concert to be given to the returned volunteers. Carried.

Mr. BROWN moved the Convention adjourn. Lost.

Mr. LOGAN moved the Convention resolve into committee
of the whole. Carried, and Mr. Z. Casey was called to the chair.

The committee took up the report ofthe Legislative Committee,
at the 6th section which was under consideration when the com-
mittee rose on yesterday.

Mr. HARDING moved to amend said section by inserting
after the word "districts" where it first occurs, the following: "no
county shall vote for more than one member of the House of

FRIDAY, JULY 2, 1847 303

Representatives.["] Decided in the negative. Yeas 24, nays not
counted.

Mr. HARDING moved to insert after "apportioned," where
it first occurs, "so that no election district shall be enlarged unless
the fraction over the ratio of population, exceed one-third the ratio,
and then not unless with contiguous territory." Yeas 55, nays 61.

Mr. LOGAN offered the same amendment except instead of
"one-third," it read "one-fourth."

Mr. ROBBINS moved to add to the amendment "so that each
county having not less than three-fourths of the ratio shall be
entitled to one representative." Which amendment to the
amendment was lost.

Mr. LOGAN then withdrew his amendment.

Mr. HAYES moved to strike out the words "as hereafter
provided for" and insert "in all future apportionments when more
than one county shall be thrown into a representative district, all
the representatives to which said counties may be entitled shall be
elected by the whole district." Which was adopted.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out "twenty-five and seventy-
five" and insert "thirty-five and sixty-five." Lost.

Sec. 7. TIME OF MEETING OF THE LEGISLATURE

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out January, 1849 (the time
of the meeting of the first Legislature under the constitution)
and insert December, 1848. Lost.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to add that the Legis-
lature "shall not continue in session for a longer period than
sixty days."

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to add to the amendment, "and
the Governor shall have the power to prolong the session, if in his
opinion the public interests demand the same." The two amend-
ments were decided in the negative.

Sec. 8. officers of the two houses and quorum
Mr. WEAD moved to strike out "two-thirds," with a view to

insert a larger number to constitute a quorum. Lost.

Sec. 9. Yeas and nays on any question shall at the desire of

any two members be entered on journal.

304 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. GRAHAM moved to strike out "two" and insert "one."
Lost.

Sec. 10. Any two members may protest &c., and have their
reasons entered on the journal.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to strike out "two" and insert "five."
Lost.

Sec. II. Each house may, with the concurrence of two-thirds,
expel a member &c.

Mr. LEMON moved to strike out "two-thirds" and insert "a
majority." Lost.

Mr. VANCE moved to insert after "two-thirds" "of all the
members elect." Carried.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin moved to add: "and the reasons
for such expulsion shall be entered on the journal, with the
names of members voting for the same." Yeas 65, nays 46.
Carried.

Sees. 12, 13, 14 and 15, were passed without any amendment.

Sec. 16. PASSAGE of bills

Mr. KENNER moved to add, "and no bill shall become a law
without a concurrence of a majority of all the members elected
from each house." Yeas 62, nays 28.

No quorum. The committee rose and the chairman reported
to the Convention that the committee was without a quorum.

Mr. LOGAN moved that the committee have leave to sit
again on Monday. Yeas 100, nays 10.

Mr. GEDDES moved the Convention adjourn. Carried, and
the Convention adjourned till Monday next, at 10 o'clock a. m.

XXIII. MONDAY, JULY 5, 1847

The Convention was called to order by Mr. Edwards of
Sangamon at the request and in the absence of the President.

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Bergen.

Mr. BUTLER presented two petitions from citizens of Lake
county, praying certain reforms in the Legislative Department;
which were referred to the committee on that department.

And, also, a petition from the same source, praying the election
of district attorneys, &c., by the people. Referred to committee
on Organization of Departments.

Also, a petition, from the same source, praying the abolition
of county commissioners' courts.

Mr. Edwards of Madison, Mr. Dummer, Mr. Hill, Mr.
Anderson, and Mr. Davis of McLean, presented petitions,
praying the- appointment of a State school superintendent.
Referred to committee on Education.

Mr. VERNOR presented petitions from citizens of Washington
county in relation to naturalization of foreigners. Referred to
committee on Bill of [Rights.]

Mr. SCATES moved that the Convention resolve itself into
committee of the whole on the report of the committee on the
Legislative Department.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the
whole — Mr. Z. Casey in the Chair. The question pending when
the committee rose on Friday was on the amendment to the i6th
section of the referred article, and being taken was decided in the
affirmative.

Sec. 17. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the
House of Representatives, &c.

Mr. CHURCH moved to strike out the section. Lost.

Section 18. Every bill shall be read on three different days in

each House, unless in case of urgency, when three-fourths of the

House where such bill is so depending shall deem it expedient to

dispense with this rule; and every bill, having passed both Houses,

305

3o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

shall be signed by the speakers of their respective Houses; and no
private or local law which may be passed by the Legislature shall
embrace more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the
title; and no general law shall be in force until published.

Mr. BALLINGALL moved to insert after the words "general
law," the following: "shall contain any matter not pertinent to
the title and first section [t]hereof." Lost.

Mr. HOLMES moved to strike out "published" and insert
"sixty days after its passage." Lost.

Mr. PETERS moved to insert after "Houses," where it
occurs last, "nor shall any bill become a law until the same shall
have been printed for the use of the members." Lost.

Mr. KNOX moved to strike out the words "private and
local;" which was carried.

Mr. WEAD moved to strike out "and no general law shall be
in force until published." And he gave as a reason for this, that
the fact of "publication of a law would, hereafter, lead to great
uncertainty. The motion was afterwards withdrawn.

Mr. HAYES moved to reconsider the vote by which the words
"private or local" had been stricken out. And the same was
reconsidered, and the question being taken upon that motion to
strike out, it was decided in the negative.

Mr. SINGLETON offered an amendment, which being modi-
fied at the suggestion of Mr. Logan, was adopted as follows:

Strike out all after the word "title," and insert "and no
private or public act of the General Assembly shall take effect, or
be in force, until after the expiration of sixty days from the end
of the session, at which the same may be passed, unless in case of
emergency, the Legislature shall otherwise direct, by a vote of
two-thirds of each branch of the Legislature. ["]

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out the words "private and."
Carried.

Sec. 19. STYLE OF LAW

No amendment.

Sec. 20. The sum of two dollars per day, for the first forty-
two days' attendance, and one dollar per day for each day's
attendance thereafter, and ten cents for each necessary mile's
travel, going to and returning from the seat of government, shall

MONDAY, JULY s, r847 307

be allowed to the members of the General Assembly, as a compen-
sation for their services.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to strike out "forty-two"
and insert "sixty." Yeas 44, nays 50. No quorum. By unani-
mous consent, the vote was taken again. Yeas 48, nays 55. No
quorum.

The committee then rose, and the chairman reported to the
Convention that the committee was without a quorum.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved a call of the Convention.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess suggested that as the object
of the call was only for the purpose of ascertaining whether
a quorum was present or not, he hoped that the President would
count the members present.

Mr. CASEY withdrew his call.

Mr. THOMAS renewed the motion for a call, and it was
ordered. And one hundred and twenty-eight members answered
to their names. The Convention then resolved itself into a
committee of the whole — Mr. Casey in the Chair.

And the question being on striking out, the same was decided
in the negative — yeas 51, nays 64.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to strike out "two dollars"
and insert "not exceeding three dollars." Lost.

Mr. SCATES moved to insert before the word "attendance,"
wherever it occurs, "actual;" decided in the negative.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to add to the section, "and no more."
Carried.

Mr. ROUNTREE offered an amendment allowing the Speaker
of the House of Representatives $1 additional pay each day; the
clerk of the House and secretary of the Senate to be allowed ^3 a
day; the assistant secretaries, door-keepers and engrossing clerks
fi per day.

Mr. LOGAN moved to amend the amendment by allowing the
Speaker %i per diem additional.

Mr. KITCHELL moved the committee rise; decided in the
affirmative — yeas 58, nays 50. The committee rose, reported
progress, and asked leave to sit again; which was granted.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

3o8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

AFTERNOON

The Convention met, but few members being present, a call
was ordered and made; and after the absentees had been again
called a quorum appeared.

Mr. THOMAS moved the committee go into committee of the
whole. Carried, and Mr. Z. Casey was called to the Chair.
The Convention then resumed the consideration of the report of
the committee on the Legislative Department. The question
pending was on the amendment proposed by Mr. Logan to the
amendment of Mr. Rountree; and the question was taken thereon
and decided in the negative.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to amend the amendment by striking
out all except so much thereof as related to the pay of the Speaker;
which was adopted — yeas 65, nays 44.

Mr. SCATES moved to allow the President of the Senate the
same pay as the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Lost.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to insert, after "two dollars a day,"
the words, "in gold and silver, or its equivalent;" decided in the
negative.

Mr. ADAMS offered, as an additional section to be numbered
21, the following: "The per diem and mileage allowed each
member, shall be certified by the Speaker of each House, and shall
be entered upon the journal." Carried — yeas 80, nays not counted.

Mr. DEITZ moved to strike out the words "ten cents for each
necessary mile's travel," and insert "fifteen cents," &c. Lost.

Section 21. No amendment.

Sec. 22. No senator or representative shall, during the time
for which he shall have been elected, or during one year after the
expiration thereof, be appointed or elected to any civil office
under this State, which shall have been created, or the emoluments
of which shall have been increased, during such time.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to strike out all after the word
"elected," where it first occurs, and insert, "be eligible to any
civil office under the authority of this State."

Mr. WEAD moved to insert in the amendment, after "civil
office," "or place of trust;" which amendment was accepted; and
the question being taken, it was lost.

MONDAY, JULY 5, i847 309

Mr. THORNTON moved to insert, as an additional section,
the following: "And no person who has been or may be a collector
or holder of public moneys, shall have a seat in either house of the
General Assembly until such person shall have accounted for, and
paid into the treasury, all sums for which he may be accountable."

Mr. WEAD moved to insert after the words "civil office,"
"or place of trust." Carried.

Mr. HILL moved to strike out "one year after the expiration
thereof." Lost.

Sec. 23. The House of Representatives shall have the sole
power of impeaching; but a majority of all the members present
must concur in an impeachment. All impeachments shall be
tried by the Senate; and when sitting for that purpose, the senators
shall be upon oath, or affirmation, to do justice according to law
and evidence. No person shall be convicted without the concur-
rence of two-thirds of all the members present.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to strike out the word
"present" and insert "elected." Carried.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out "two-thirds," and insert
"majority." Lost.

Section 24. No amendment.

Sec. 25. No judge of any court of law or equity, secretary of
State, attorney general, attorney for the State, register, clerk of
any court of record, sheriff or collector, member of either House of
Congress, or person holding any lucrative office under the U.
States or this State, (provided that appointments in the militia,
postmasters, or justices of the peace, shall not be considered lucra-
tive offices,) shall have a seat in the General Assembly; nor shall
any person holding any office of honor or profit under the govern-
ment of the United States, hold any office of honor or profit under
the authority of this State.

Mr. BALLINGALL moved to insert after "shall" where it
first occurs, "during the time he shall hold the office, be eligible,"
&c. Lost.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to strike out "Postmasters."
Carried.

Mr. HURLBUT moved to strike out "Register" and insert
"Recorder." Adopted.

3IO ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sec. 26. No amendment.

Mr. SCATES offered as another section a long series of defined
powers to be conferred upon tiie Legislature. He then, briefly,
explained the necessity of placing in the constitution limitations
on the powers of the Legislature, and the question being taken
thereon, it was lost.

Mr. WEAD oflFered as an additional section the following:

The Legislature shall never grant or authorize extra compen-
sation to any public officer, agent, servant or contractor, after the
service shall have been rendered or the contract entered into.
Adopted.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to re-consider the vote by which
Mr. ScATEs' amendment was lost. And the same was re-consid-
ered. After a short discussion upon the proper mode of bringing
the matter understandingly before the Convention, by Messrs.
Minshall, Servant, Peters, and Davis of Massac the proposed
section was withdrawn.

Mr. HARVEY moved to add "that the Legislature shall never
have power to appropriate more than dollars for con-
tingent expenses." Lost.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon offered as an additional section
the following:

The General Assembly shall direct in what manner suits may be
brought against the State; and no claim against the State shall
be allowed until proven and established before some tribunal and
afterwards approved by the Legislature.

Mr. KITCHELL moved to strike out all after the word
"tribunal," which was decided in the negative; and then the
proposed section was adopted.

Sections 28 and 29. No amendments.

Sec. 30. The General Assembly shall have no power to
authorize, by private or special law, the sale of any lands or other
real estate belonging in whole or in part to any minor or
minors, or other person or persons, who may at any time be under
any legal disability to act for themselves.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to strike out all after
the words "in whole or in part to any," and insert "individuals,"
and the amendment was adopted.

MONDAY, J ULY 5, 1847 3 1 1

Sec. 31. The General Assembly shall have no power to sus-
pend any general law for the benefit of any particular individual,
nor to pass any law for the benefit of individuals inconsistent with
the general laws of the land; nor to pass any law granting to any
individual or individuals rights, privileges, immunities, or exemp-
tions, other than such as may be, by the same law, extended to
any member of the community who may be able to bring himself
within the provisions of such law; nor shall the Legislature pass
any law whereby any person shall be deprived of his life, liberty,
property, or franchises, without trial and judgment.

Mr. BUTLER moved to insert after the word "individual,"
where it first occurs in the section, "corporations or associations."
Lost.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to insert after "indi-
vidual" where it first occurs, "nor to pass any law authorizing any
proceeding in any court affecting the property or rights of any
individuals other than is allowed under the general laws of the
State." Yeas 62, nays 41; no quorum voting. By unanimous
consent a second vote was taken and the amendment was adopted.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out all after the words "provi-
sions of such law." Before any question was taken thereon
Mr. Geddes moved that the committee rise, and ask leave to sit
again; which motion was granted, and the committee rose, the
chairman reported progress and asked leave to sit again; which
was granted.

Mr. SCATES moved that certain amendments to the report
of the Legislative committee, be laid on the table and printed;
which motion was agreed to.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till to-morrow
at 9 A. M.

XXIV. TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Dresser.

Mr. ROBBINS presented a petition of sundry citizens of
Randolph county, praying the exemption of a homestead from
execution; referred to the committee on Law Reform.

Mr. SERVANT presented a petition of sundry citizens of
Kaskaskia in relation to certain commons granted to them.
Referred to a select committee of five.

Mr. WEAD presented a petition of 62 citizens of Fulton
county, praying the appointment [of] a State superintendent of
Education; referred to the committee on Education.

The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention a communica-
tion from the Auditor of Public Accounts, in reply to a resolution
of the Convention, requiring information of the amount of revenue
since 1839, with reports from the clerks of 17 counties.

Mr. THOMAS moved that the report and accompanying
documents be laid on the table and 500 copies printed.

Mr. KITCHELL suggested that the report and documents be
referred to the committee on Revenue, for the present.

Mr. THOMAS withdrew his motion, and the documents and
report were referred to the committee on Revenue.

Mr. HARVEY, from the committee on Incorporations, pre-
sented the report of the majority of the committee; which report
he moved be laid on the table and 200 copies be printed. 500 and
1,000 were suggested, and 1,000 copies were ordered to be printed.

Banks — Incorporations
Majority Report

Article Corporations

Sec. I. Corporations not possessing banking powers or privi-
leges may be formed under general laws, but shall not be created
by special acts except for municipal purposes, and in cases where,
in the judgment of the Legislature, the objects of the corporation
cannot be attained under general laws.
312

TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1847 313

Sec. 2. Dues from corporations, not possessing banking
powers or privileges, shall be secured by such individual liabilities
of the corporators, or other means, as may be prescribed by law.

Sec. 3. No State bank shall hereafter be created, nor shall
the State own, or be liable for, any stock in any corporation or
joint stock association for banking purposes.

Sec. 4. No banking powers or privileges shall be granted either
by general or special acts of incorporation, unless directed by the
people of the State as hereinafter provided.

Sec. 5. The Legislature may, at any session, but not oftener
than once in four years, direct the vote of the people to be taken,
on the day of the general election, for or against the absolute pro-
hibition contained in the fourth section of this article, six months'
notice having first been given; and if a majority voting shall decide
against the prohibition contained in the said fourth section, the
Legislature may authorize the forming of corporations or associa-
tions for banking purposes by general acts of incorporations, upon
the following conditions:

1st. No law shall be passed sanctioning in any manner,
directly or indirectly, the suspension of specie payments.

2d. Ample security shall be required for the redemption, in
specie, of all bills and notes put in circulation as money, and a
registry of all such bills and notes shall be required.

3d. The stockholders in every corporation and joint stock
association for banking purposes issuing bank notes or any kind
of paper credits to circulate as money, shall be individually re-
sponsible to the amount of their respective share or shares of stock
in any such corporation or association for all its debts and liabili-
ties of every kind.

4th. In case of insolvency of any bank or banking association,
the bill holders shall be entitled to preference in payment over all
other creditors of such bank or association.

5th. Non-payment of specie shall be a forfeiture of all bank-
ing rights and privileges, and the Legislature shall not have power
to remit the forfeiture or relieve from any of its consequences; and
provision shall be made by law for the trial, in a summary way, by
the judicial tribunals, of all contested questions of forfeiture of
banking privileges.

314 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sec. 6. Acts of incorporation for municipal purposes, whether
general or special, may at any time be altered, amended or re-
pealed, and all general acts granting corporate powers of any kind
other than for municipal purposes may at any time be altered,
amended or repealed. But such alteration, amendment or repeal
shall, unless the right to make the same be reserved, operate pros-
pectively.

Mr. HARVEY, from the same committee, reported back
sundry resolutions, (Mr. Pratt's resolutions,) in relation to a
provision to be inserted in the constitution, that all contracts
based upon paper currency shall be void, and asked leave to be dis-
charged from the further consideration of the same. Concurred in.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair presented a report from the
minority of the committee on Incorporations.

Minority Report

Sec. I. No corporate body shall be hereafter created, re-
newed, or extended, within this State; with banking or discount-
ing privileges.

Sec. 1. Corporations shall not be created in this State by
special laws, but the Legislature shall provide by general and
uniform laws, under which corporations, or associations of persons,
may be formed, and not otherwise, except corporations with bank-
ing or discounting privileges, the creation of which is prohibited.

Sec. 3. No person, corporation, or association of persons,
shall be allowed to make, issue, or put in circulation, within this
State, any bill, check, ticket, certificate, or other paper, or the
paper of any bank or its branches, or any evidence of debt, intend-
ed to circulate as money.

Sec. 4. No branch, or agency, of any bank or banking insti-
tution in the United States, or any State or Territory, within or
without the United States, shall be established or maintained
within this State.

Sec. 5. The members of such corporations, or associations of
persons, shall be individually liable for the debts, liabilities and
acts of such corporations, or associations, and for the consequences
resulting therefrom.

On motion ordered that 1,000 copies be printed.

TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1847 315

Mr. HARVEY, from the committee on Incorporations, to
whom had been referred various propositions in relation to banks,
reported the same back to the Convention, and asked to be dis-
charged from the further consideration of them. Concurred in.

Mr. JENKINS, from the committee on the Division of the
State into Counties, and the Organization thereof, made a report,
which was laid on the table and 500 copies ordered to be printed.

Mr. TURNBULL presented a report of the minority of the
same committee, which was laid on the table and ordered to be
printed with the other.

Mr. JENKINS, from the same committee, made a report in
accordance with certain instructions from the Convention, and
recommended that the same be not adopted. Ordered that 500
copies be printed.

Mr. JENKINS offered a resolution of inquiry; referred to the
committee on Judiciary.

Mr. LOGAN moved the Convention resolve itself into commit-
tee of the whole. And the Convention went into committee of
the whole — Mr. Woodson in the chair, and resumed the considera-
tion of the report of the Legislative committee. The question
pending at the time of adjournment yesterday was on the striking
out of the latter clause of the 31st section, all after the words
"such law."

Mr. HARVEY advocated the motion to strike out, on the
ground that the clause as it stood now would effectually deprive
the State of the power to sell land for unpaid taxes. He contended
that if this were done, the State would be deprived of one of her
main sources of revenue; and of the only means of collecting taxes
due by non-resident landholders.

Mr. WILLIAMS followed in opposition to the motion. He
thought that the introduction of the question of tax upon land,
into the question was unnecessary and uncalled for. He thought
the only proper question was, should the Legislature have power
to pass laws whereby a man's liberty or property could be taken
away, without first obtaining for that law the sanction and
approval of the judicial branch of the government. This was
secured by the words "a trial of judgment," now proposed to be
stricken out. He then went into an elaborate discussion of the

31 6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

nature and propriety of selling a man's property to pay taxes
thereon; thus depriving and disseizing a man of his freehold, with-
out a trial and judgment of a court; which he said was in violation
of the great fundamental princ[i]ples of our government. He
pointed out the great length the courts of Illinois had gone to in
sustaining tax titles, and the unjust and unrighteous consequences
thereof upon the land owner.

Mr. LOGAN opposed not only the last clause, but the whole
section. Its language was new, and unfamiliar to the courts and
to the people; it could not be so readily understood as the old, long
known and sufficient language contained in the bill of rights. He
thought we would be going too far in thus binding and prohibiting
the Legislature from doing anything which that section might be
construed to embrace.

He then explained at some length, the clause proposed to be
stricken out, and said that the words "the Legislature shall not
pass any law whereby any person shall be deprived of his life,
liberty, property or franchise, without trial and judgment," had a
much greater effect than some gentlemen seemed to put upon
them. He interpreted those words, as prohibiting the arrest, or
seizure of any person on mesne process, or the detention of any
man's property (no matter what the circumstances of the case
might be) by attachment. He argued for some time on the in-
convenience and disadvantages of such a law. He put this case
among many others: that no man could be put in jail upon any
charge, and detained there for a moment, without depriving him
of his liberty. Now, the clause proposed to be stricken out, said
no man could be deprived of his liberty without a "trial and
judgment;" and how, he asked, was this to be done. How could
a man have a "trial and judgment," be tried and adjudged,
unless he appear and be tried. He proposed that in the bill of
rights, and not in this article of the constitution, there should be
inserted the well known provision, found in all constitutions and
taken from Magna Charta, that "no man should be deprived of
his life, liberty, &c., unless by a trial of his peers and the law of
the land." After entering into the bearing this clause had upon
the question of a sale of land for unpaid taxes, he moved that the
whole section be stricken out.

TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1847 317

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin was in favor of the section
remaining as it had been reported by the committee. He thought
that the provisions in the first part of the section, were wise, and
should be adopted; and the mere fact of their not being in familiar
language was not sufficient for him to vote against them. He
thought that the cases put by the gentleman from Sangamon, as
necessarily following the adoption of the latter clause, were
extreme cases and could be easily avoided by a further provision
in some other part of the constitution.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said that at first he was in favor
of the motion to strike out, but from what had been said, he was
now in opposition to that motion. He was wholly opposed to
striking out the first part of the section, where it prohibits the
suspension of general laws for the benefit and convenience of private
individuals; and put to the Convention an example of its operation.
He said the Legislature had been for many sessions beset by appli-
cations for extension of time to sheriffs and collectors, in which to
make their returns. In one case in his county the time had been
extended to a sheriff, and that extension had released his sureties,
and now the same man was more unable to account with the State,
than he was at the time of the suspension. He was also opposed
to the passage of any special law, suspending general laws for the
benefit of any individual. He did. not care much whether the
provision should be retained in this article, but he desired it should
be somewhere in the constitution.

Mr. WEAD said, that he had known for years, and had heard
and witnessed much of the extraordinary ingenuity of the gentle-
man from Sangamon, and the influence he exerted over men's
minds by his perseverance and ingenuity where he had some
particular object to carry. He never dreamed that any member
of the Convention could be induced to reject the section, until he
heard the argument of that gentleman, and remembered his great
talent in carrying out his views, and accomplishing what he under-
takes by special and ingenious argument. He says that this pro-
vision is contained in new language and difficult to understand;
that it will lead to confusion and chaos in the interpretation of it
by courts of law; that it cannot be comprehended unless it shall
be passed on by courts of law. Mr. W. read the clause: "Shall

3i8 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

not suspend any general law for the benefit of any particular
individual." Cannot this be understood by any man? Does it
require a court of justice to pass on this to enable the gentleman
from Sangamon to understand it? We all know the gentleman's
ability to comprehend such things, and measuring this language
by the gentleman's ability to understand, must we not believe
that he can understand it without the aid of a court of justice?
We must come to that conclusion. Now, sir, if he can and does
understand its meaning, and advocates that it be stricken out,
should we not infer that he is opposed to the restriction, and in
favor of granting the power to the Legislature to create laws
bestowing this evil of special privileges ? Does he understand the
clause, or is he in favor of granting the power? On which horn
of the dilemma is he? Mr. W. read the next clause: "Nor to
pass any law for the benefit of individuals inconsistent with the
laws of the land." Is there anything in this difficult to be under-
stood? Cannot the gentleman from Sangamon understand the
plain language of that clause, or is he in favor of leaving with the
Legislature the power which this clause prohibits? What is it
but a prohibition against the granting to one man privileges and
powers not conferred or enjoyed by all. The same argument will
apply to the whole of the first part of the section. He then came
to the last part of the section: "Nor shall the Legislature pass
any law whereby any person shall be deprived of his life, liberty,
property or franchises, without trial and judgment." He had
heard the able and ingenious argument of the gentleman against
this section, and upon its effect upon the titles to land derived
under tax sales, and notwithstanding their ability, &c. he would
attempt to answer them. He said that in other States it had
been over and again decided that no man should be disseized of his
freehold and his land sold except on a judgment of law; that they
had decided that no land should be sold for non-payment of taxes
except on a judgment. But the supreme court of Illinois had
decided otherwise. Here was a great difference in opinion upon a
great principle of right, and in judicial interpretation of the power
to deprive a man of his freehold. This provision was intended to
meet this difficulty by setting, in the constitution, the true and
proper meaning and construction of law on this subject, and with

TUESDAY, JULY 6, 184.7 319

a view to preserve, inviolate, the right of property. It is said that
the question is, shall land be sold for taxes or not? That, said
Mr. W., is not the question. If I understand the provision now
before us, or the views of the honorable author of it, the question
is, shall land be sold for taxes without having first a judgment?
Mr. W. then went into an inquiry of the nature of the titles by
which the greater part of the land in the military tract were held,
and advocated the adoption of the clause proposed to be stricken
out, because it would require a judgment before a sale of property.
He cited several cases showing where this provision would operate
advantageously. — Without concluding, he gave way to a motion
that the committee rise.

The committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit
again.

The Convention then, on motion, adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention met, no quorum appearing, on motion, a call
of the Convention was ordered. After a quorum appeared and
further proceedings were dispensed with,

Mr. MARKLEY moved the Convention resolve itself into
committee of the whole — Mr. Woodson in the chair, and resumed
the consideration of the report of the committee on the Legislative
Department.

Mr. WEAD resumed his remarks. He denied that it would
be more difficult to overturn or set aside a deed given under a sale
after judgment, than it would be under a deed without a judgment,
and as had been previously the case in this State. He proceeded
to give a history of the various laws passed by the Legislature in
relation to taxes. In 1823 the first law was passed for the sale of
land for taxes. It required that, before the sale, they should be
advertised, and then the Auditor might go on and sell them without
any judgment. That law said the Auditor's deed should convey
a perfect title to the purchaser, no matter how it had been adver-
tised, or whether anything had been done according to law. The
deed was sufficient — it conveyed a perfect title. In 1827 this law
was changed. It required the land to be advertised in a particular
manner, but when the Auditor gave a deed, it vested in the

320 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

purchaser a perfect title; and it made no difference whether it had
been advertised according to law or sold for the right amount, &c.
The deed vested a perfect title. It swept everything from the
tax payer without any trial or judgment. Our courts had uni-
formly decided that the mere deed shall be full and conclusive
evidence of title, without requiring any proof of the execution
of the deed, or of any of the pre-requisite facts, mentioned in the
law. Could any judgment of a court give a better or a stronger
title than this? But it begun [sic] to be doubted whether the
perfect title could be given to the purchaser under this deed, as
that article of the bill of rights says no man shall be disseized of his
freehold, &c. And in 1839 the legislature passed a law saying
that a judgment should be had before a sale of a man's property.
But our supreme court said, that the provision, said to be in the
Magna Charta, did not apply to such cases, as the deed was a
patent. Mr. W. then read from the law of 1839, the various facts
which the tax deed shall be conclusive evidence of, and throwing
upon the man claiming the property under the original grant, the
necessity and difficulty of disproving them. This latter he con-
tended it was almost impossible to accomplish, in consequence of
no records being kept by the officers, of those transactions, necessary
for him to make out his case. He contended that the policy of
all legislation in this State, from 1823, had been to make these
deeds the strongest kind of titles, and conclusive evidence of the
facts necessary to establish them. But the supreme court had at
length decided that a judgment was necessary, and then a law was
passed requiring a judgment.

Before this law the deed of the Auditor was omnipotent —
changed a man's property at once; now you must first have a
judgment and an execution. It was to secure this, that the
present provision was inserted; strike it out and you take away the
last safeguard a man has over his property. In the course of
Mr. W'.s remarks, he replied to the argument of Mr. Logan, in
relation to the effect this clause would have upon holding a man's
property, under an attachment and the arrest under mesne process;
and denied that any such interpretation could be placed upon it as
argued by Mr. L.

Mr. Logan repeated his former views of the question in all its

TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1847 321

bearings upon the tax question, and deprecated too much action
on the part of the Convention in providing a remedy and a pro-
hibition for every imaginary evil. He thought, as has been said,
that all the wisdom of the State had not been exhausted in forming
that Convention, and that we should trust much to the discretion
and judgment of the Legislatures to come after us. He thought
that while we were complaining so much of too much legislation,
there was also a danger of our performing too much constitutioning.
He said the present provision was in the words "trial and judg-
ment," which were very different in their import and effect from
the former and well known phrase — "trial by his peers and the
law of the land:" and he argued at length that the words "law
of the land" should be inserted after the clause as it now stood;
or, if the clause were stricken out, that those words, with such
other provisions as might be deemed necessary, should be inserted
in the bill of rights. He objected to a prohibition being inserted
in the constitution restraining the Legislature from suspending
any general law for the benefit of private individuals. He had
voted for suspending such laws in more instances than one; and
if such cases should arise again, and he denied that he could say
they would not, he would always vote for it. He alluded to the
cases where the whole American bottom was overflowed by the
great freshet in '44, and when the people of that section of the
country lost everything they had, or only secured so much as to
enable them to live till such time as they could regain in some
measure the means of subsistence, then the sheriffs of those
counties applied to the Legislature for an extension of their time
for making their returns, because they could not, in many cases,
collect taxes without seizing upon what little had been spared the
people by the flood. The Legislature had suspended the law upon
these circumstances, he had voted for it, and would any man in
the Convention oppose it, or refuse to grant an extension of the
time under such terrible and afflicting circumstances? He had
also voted for an extension of time to collectors and sheriffs when
the offices in which their books and accounts had been kept were
destroyed by fire, and they were unable to account with the Audi-
tor. He pointed out that under this section no charters could be
granted to individuals to construct railroads or any other kind of

322 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

improvement, for if they did it was conferring upon those persons
chartered privileges which other persons did not enjoy.'"

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said he could not see the great
difficulties in this section which had been pointed out by the
gentlemen, and which they had discovered to be so alarming.
The language appeared plain to him and not in anyway to be
misunderstood. It was a prohibition against special laws and
a suspension of general laws for the benefit of particular individuals.
He thought the cases mentioned by the gentleman last up — the
cases of the flood — and of fire, might be provided for by a general
law, giving the Legislature a power under certain circumstances
which would enable them to meet these cases. It had been said
that this prohibition would put an end to all railroads being
constructed by private individuals. Now, when an object can be
obtained by a general law, as well as by special laws, general laws
should be adopted. Suppose a law be passed that A. and B. shall
have the privilege of constructing a railroad from Alton to Spring-
field, it is a special law, and the same object can be obtained by a
general law, that any person may construct that road, thus
bringing all persons who have the means of bringing themselves
within the provisions of the law, into competition and permitting
them to make the road.

Mr. THOMAS. Will the gentleman show me how a man can,
under a general law, obtain an exclusive privilege.?

Mr. PALMER. Suppose the gentleman and I are desirous
to have a certain quarter section of land, and we both start to-
night to Edwardsville for that purpose; I arrive there first and
have the land entered in my name. I thus, under a general law
obtain a peculiar special privilege and right in that land, to the
exclusion of every one else. I hope the gentleman considers
himself answered. I obtain this right under no special act, but
simply from superiority of speed with which I started. This same
rule, if applied to railroads, would be found to act as well; for it
would then enable every man, with means, to enter into the
business.

Mr. WILLIAMS made some remarks in reply to what had

^K longer account of Logan's speech may be found in the Sangamo
Journal, July 15.

TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1847 323

been said about the law of the land, and argued in favor of
the retention of the last clause. He also alluded further to the
question. The question was then taken on the motion to strike
out the whole question, and decided in the negative.

The question was taken on the motion to strike out the last
section, and decided in the negative.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to add to the section the following
words : "in court, provided nothing herein contained shall prevent
the passage of any law for seizing and holding persons or property
by mesne process until such trial can be had."

Mr. HARVEY moved to insert after the words "trial and
judgment" the words "or law of the land." And the question
being taken on the last amendment, it was decided in the negative
—yeas 46, nays 63.

Mr. THORNTON moved to insert after the word "law" where
it last occurs, "provided the General Assembly shall have power
to grant such charters of corporation as they deem expedient, and
not prohibited."

And the question was taken on Mr. Williams' amendment,
and it was decided in the affirmative.

Mr. MARKLEY moved that the committee rise. Carried.

The committee rose, reported progress and had leave to sit
again.

Mr. LOGAN asked leave for the ladies of the Episcopal church
of this city to occupy the Senate chamber on Thursday next.
Granted.

The Convention, on motion, adjourned till to-morrow, at

9 A. M.

XXV. WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Hale.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago presented a petition praying the
appointment of a superintendent of common schools. Referred
to the committee on Education.

Mr. HOLMES presented a report from the minority of the
committee on Military Affairs; read, laid on the table and 200
copies ordered to be printed.

Mr. LOGAN moved the Convention resolve itself into com-
mittee of the whole. And the Convention went into a committee
of the whole, and took up the report of the committee on the
Legislative Department — Mr. Woodson in the chair.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to strike out all after the
word "to," where it first occurs in the section, to the word "pass,"
where it occurs last.

Mr. LOGAN said, he would be glad if some member of the
committee who had reported this section would explain the
meaning of the words "nor to pass any law granting to any indi-
viduals rights, privileges, immunities or exemptions other than
such as may be, by the same law, extended to any member of the
community who may be able to bring himself within the provisions
of such law."

Mr. SCATES said, that he would state what his under-
standing of the language was. Suppose a railroad was wanted
from Alton to the Indiana line, and the Legislature should pass a
general law authorizing the same, but requiring that a subscription
should be opened and let every man subscribe to the stock who
had the means. This would be a law open in its privileges to all
who had the means of bringing themselves within the provisions
of the law, and not a special charter to a few individuals. The
language of the section is to prohibit special acts of incorporations.
If gentlemen will understand it all, it means then all these things
are to be accomplished by general laws, instead of special acts of
legislation. He was not opposed to the Legislature passing laws
324

fFEDNESDJY, JULY 7, 1847 325

allowing persons to make roads or canals, but he wanted those
laws to be general in their nature and not special. He alluded at
some length to the great cost which it had been to the State in
consequence of these acts of special legislation being continually
before the Legislature and the great amount of time wasted in
their deliberation.

Mr. LOGAN thought it meant no such thing. He thought it
offered no check to special charters of incorporation by the Legis-
lature. As to the case of the railroad subscription, that case did
not come under the language of this section, for if a charter of in-
corporation, granting certain rights, privileges and immunities to
those who subscribe, were passed by the Legislature, those only
then who first subscribed, would be entitled to the rights, benefits
&c., for no one else can bring themselves within the provisions of
the law after the stock is taken. Does this prevent special
charters? Suppose the Legislature should grant an act of incor-
poration to the Chairman and Judge Scates, to make a road — no
one can bring himself within the provisions of the law, but those
two; it is then left with the Legislature to say who shall bring
themselves "within the provisions of the law." This would be
nothing more than a special act of incorporation. He did not
desire this kind of provision, if gentlemen desired that no special
charters should be granted, why not say so plainly, in language
which every man could understand; and leave out these ambiguous
terms.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean said, he had made the motion to strike
out for a two-fold purpose. No one could foresee the great diffi-
culties which this ambiguous language contained in this section
would cause hereafter, and would throw in the way of private
relief, in meritorious cases, by the Legislature. The case men-
tioned yesterday of the suspension of the time for a sheriff's return
in consequence of the great freshet in '44 was conclusive to
his mind, and should be so to all. He objected to the binding
down of the Legislature by constitutional provisions, against
granting any relief from a general law in meritorious cases. He
protested against the wholesale abuse that gentlemen were con-
tinually throwing upon the past legislatures of the country. They,
it might be, had done wrong, but they were not to blame, they

326 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

represented public opinion and were driven by the force of that
public opinion into what they had done. He did not desire to see
incorporated into the constitution any provision which shall require
legislation and judicial interpretation upon it. If gentlemen
desired to say that no special charters should be granted, let them
come out and say so in terms that any man can understand.

Mr. BROCKMAN was opposed to striking out any of this
section, except the words "such as may be able to bring them-
selves within the provisions of the general law;" for he did not
believe there was a man in the State who was unable to avail him-
self of the privileges of a general law. Gentlemen saw something
important in this provision; it was full of meaning. Why should a
general law be suspended for the benefit of a private individual ?
In the county of Brown they had lost over ^i,ooo by extending the
time to a collector, and such would always be the case if this power
was left to the Legislature. They say this provision will prevent
the making of any more railroads through the State! Gentlemen
think and feel that this provision will act on their favorite — the
bank question! And so it does, sir; and for that very reason I will
vote against striking out. This section is full of meaning. Sup-
pose we reverse its language, and let it read, the Legislature shall
have power to suspend general laws for the benefit of private
individuals. It would then be easily understood by the gentlemen;
and it may be as easily understood in its present shape. He said,
that he had been opposed to the last clause in the section, because
it interfered with the primary arrest of persons charged with
crime, &c., but as that had been amended he would vote for it.

Mr. SCATES still could not see any objections to the section,
as had been argued by the gentlemen. If those gentlemen who
think it does not prevent special charters and special legislation
would vote for it he would be satisfied. The cases put yesterday,
where a suspension had been made, could be provided for in
another section; they could insert a power in the constitution, that
the Legislature could, in case of the destruction of a sheriff's books
by fire, extend the time for that officer's accounting, to the next
session of the Legislature. He pointed out many cases where
losses had occurred by an extension of time to these officers, and
the releasing thereby of their sureties. He objected to the many

WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 1847 3^1

reprimands that had been delivered to him in consequence of his
having spoken of the evils of past legislation, and because he had
endeavored to have adopted certain necessary remedies of the
evil, and guards against a recurrence of it. The people had called
this Convention to remedy that evil, and their representatives
should be heeded when they asked that these things should be
done. If everything was to be left open for the patriotism, dis-
cretion, and purity of future legislatures, it would be better to have
no constitution. But the people required a constitution and that
in it the powers of the Legislature should be limited, and the evils
of past legislation remedied.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac said, that various opinions had been
expressed as to the meaning and proper interpretation of these
provisions in this section. He was firmly of the opinion that
nothing contained in it prohibited, but authorized, a general
banking system, and this he was sure was not contemplated by
the gentleman from Jefferson.

Mr. SCATES said, that he supposed there would be other
provisions in the constitution upon the subject of banks, and had
no thought of it in respect to this section.

Mr. DAVIS. It is thought by many that these provisions will
restrain the acts of the Legislature, and to prevent the General
Assembly from passing acts which tend to impair the public good.
He did not entertain a doubt but that they authorized a general
banking system, and that every man who could bring himself
within the provisions of the law, will be entitled to enter into that
system. If he thought it would prohibit such a thing he would
vote for it; but believing that it would allow that system, he would
vote against it and for striking it out. He was extremely sorry
to differ from the gentleman from Jefferson, but he felt satisfied
that if that gentleman would give the subject some consideration
and mature reflection, he would come to the same conclusion. He
was in favor of a single, plain provision, that the Legislature should
grant no special charters or acts of incorporation, and would prefer
it to one which will lead to so much difficulty, debate, and strife,
as this provision would when it came to be acted on by the Legis-
lature.— He had a different opinion in relation to the duties and
objects of this Convention than that entertained by some gentle-

328 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

men. He thought they had not come there for the sole purpose
of saving a few dollars, but for the nobler and higher object of
making an organic law of the land, which was to govern the people
and secure them the greatest prosperity. Government should be
so established as to give it the power to do everything necessary
for the public good; and he thought we should not restrict the
Legislature within limits too narrow to enable them in all cases to
act for the good of all the people.

He had no doubt but that this provision will authorize general
banking throughout the State; he was satisfied that this will be
the undoubted and certain — the common sense — interpretation
that will be placed upon it. Is the gentleman from Jefferson
ready to go for it after having declared banks of every description
a curse upon the land? He thought that when gentlemen under-
stood this, the provision would not have so many advocates.

He asked, is it prudent to divest the Legislature of all power?
He thought more evil would result from this prohibition, than
would if the whole matter was left open. He explained the force
of it, under the interpretation which he said would certainly be
placed upon it, to be: A and B are authorized to bank, &c., and
any man who can bring himself within the provisions of the law is
authorized to carry on banking, this would be the sure and positive
result. Is there anything in this section providing that A and B
shall not be incorporated? Not a word. Again, any man who
can subscribe to stock in a railroad company, brings himself
within the provisions of the law, and there is no preventive against
such incorporations, and thus are brought about the very conse-
quences which the gentleman from Jefferson has opposed, and
again will the prosperity of the State be blasted and destroyed. —
It was his serious conviction that it would be better to leave the
constitution as it is, than to have any provision which will author-
ize a general banking system, allowing the creation of these
monsters all over the State, leaving its impress on the prosperity
of the people forever.^'

Mr. WILLIAMS said, he was not present at the meeting of
the committee when the section now before the Convention was

"A longer account of this speech by Davis (of Massac) may be found in
the Sangamo Journal, July 15.

WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 1847 329

adopted. He felt more interest in tiie principle contained in the
last clause, and in committee he brought it forward, and the
committee tacked it on the end of the section. That matter
having been settled, he thought that the first provisions of the
section ought to be stricken out. It would be remembered that
he had not advocated the first part of the section, but had confined
himself to the latter clause. Let those, said he, who are in favor
of such a provision and prohibition go to work and make up some-
thing and have it inserted, in some less ambiguous terms, in the
bill of rights, or some other part of the constitution; and not have
this section burdened with language and provisions so ambiguous
in their expression as to lead to much difficulty hereafter, and to
so many different interpretations.

Mr. POWERS said, he was a member of the committee, and
was present when this part of the section was adopted. The
committee thought it proper to guard against a suspension of
general laws for the benefit of private individuals; but for one, he
was satisfied that the case mentioned yesterday by the gentleman
from Sangamon, in relation to' the suspension in favor of the
sheriffs of that part of the State which had suffered so much from
the great rise in the river, showed conclusively that cases might
arise when such suspensions would be just and proper. He did
not see, however, that under the second provision of the section
that the Legislature would have the power to authorize general
banking. That provision, in his opinion, would defeat all special
charters; and if any doubt was entertained the other provisions
in the constitution, in relation to that subject, would settle the
matter.

Mr. HARVEY said, that on yesterday he was in favor of the
first part of the section, but now he was ready to vote against all
of it, and would state his reasons. There were many in the Con-
vention who were in favor of a prohibition against banks, to be
inserted in the constitution. Now, if he understood the gentleman
from Massac, general banking might be established under this
section, and for that reason he would vote against the section. If
he (Mr. H.) was in favor of a general banking system he would vote
against the section, and if opposed to such a system he would
vote against the section. It was too ambiguous and indefinite.

330 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

and he thought it a cowardly way of fighting the question. Let
the principle be stated plainly, and not shelter the scheme behind
a provision couched in ambiguous language. The prohibitionist
and the anti-prohibitionist, each, see their object in this section;
it blows hot, and it blows cold, but he thought that it would be
found to blow neither. Now, if this section came to be passed on
by the judiciary what would be the decision? If the gentleman
from Jefferson was the judge of the supreme court, we should have
a total prohibition interpretation; if the gentleman from Sangamon
was the judge, we would have a general banking interpretation;
for he believed that both of these gentlemen have expressed their
true opinions on the subject.

Mr. H. alluded to the fact that this provision would not enable
a man to establish a ferry on our rivers, because every man had
not the same right; and he asked, were they prepared to say we
should have no ferries because their owners enjoyed rights not
enjoyed by all?

Mr. SERVANT was of opinion that this provision was very
little understood, either by its friends or opponents, and it re-
minded him of an anecdote told of an Irishman, who was asked
what was the meaning of metaphysics. He replied, "when you
see two men disputing and arguing upon some subject, and neither
understands what the other has said, nor what he is saying himself,
nor what is the subject of debate — that is metaphysics."

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said, that the only serious objec-
tion to the provision was its ambiguity. So far as that was
concerned he thought it plain enough to be understood by any one
who was disposed to do so, and he would say to the gentleman
from Knox that he, nor any of those "fifty-eight" with whom he
had voted in opposition to banks in any shape, were disposed to
fight behind any ambiguity; they sought no cowardly means to
accomplish their ends; they desired to fight no bush fight. But
the gentleman's position could be compared with that of a man
who came into town one day, very drunk, and sat down in the
street, declaring that the whole town was drunk and he only sober;
so with the gentleman from Knox, he cannot see the meaning of
this sentence, and therefore thinks no one else can understand
it. He thinks everybody else is drunk and does not see himself

WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 1847 331

staggering. Mr. P. had a word to say in relation to banks, which
he did not think in any way effected [sic] by this provision. Here-
after, in some other part of the constitution, in some other section,
would be inserted a provision in relation to incorporations; and
will any ambiguity contained in this section have bearing upon
that express provision on the particular subject? It is a well
established legal rule, that where there is any provision in a law
open and plain upon any particular subject, that any other section,
which, if it stood alone, might have a bearing upon that subject,
shall not affect the question as settled in the section upon the
particular subject. Now, the questions of ferries and banks, if we
provide for them specially, will not in any way be affected by any
bearing this section may have upon those subjects. Again,
suppose we say that nothing contained in this section shall have
any reference to the subject of banks or ferries, would it not be
admitted that such a declaration would obviate the difficulty?
Well, if a well estabhshed legal principle of interpretation
has the same effect, then the objections of the gentleman from
Knox, from Massac, and from Sangamon and other objectors fall
to the ground. The gentleman from Randolph has, as we some-
times say, taken water; he says this section may be perverted to
other purposes than intended by the committee or the Convention,
The committee who reported this section, knew that the subjects
of banks and incorporations had been referred to another com-
mittee, and supposed that a provision would be reported to be
inserted in the constitution, which would settle the matter. Mr. P.
again repeated that the "fifty-eight," were no bush fighters, and
would be found ready to meet their opponents on the subject of
banks, in a fair and open field.

Mr. LOGAN said, he had taken the meaning he placed on
these provisions from the gentleman from Jefferson, who said it
was to prevent special charters; but it appeared that even the
friends of the section were not of one opinion as to its meaning.
He said he believed the interpretation of the gentleman from
Macoupin was the correct one. But there was no general law
that would not have to be suspended in some cases, or acts should
be passed which would protect certain persons; for instance, the
judges of our courts should be privileged from arrest, the members

33^ ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of the Legislature, jurors and witnesses, while in attendance,
should be privileged from arrest. These persons all enjoyed
rights, privileges and immunities not enjoyed by the rest of the
community. Would any man be in favor of depriving those per-
sons of that right and privilege from arrest? If so, a man who
desired to defeat a cause had only to have issued a writ, and the
judge would be arrested sitting on the bench; witnesses would be
arrested and taken away, and a man might lose his case in conse-
quence. These were cases, and there were many others which
this section did not provide for, and which would be defeated were
it allowed to pass.

Mr. SCATES explained what his interpretation of the section
was — to prevent special legislation — and renewed his opposition
to the motion to strike out.

Mr. KNOWLTON said, he was sick of this 31st section. He
had heard all that had been said upon it and his opinions had not
been changed in anywise. He did not understand the section at
first nor did he now. Organic law should be plain in its provisions,
so plain that all might understand it clearly; there should be no
ambiguity in its language. If the object was to prevent special
legislation, let the section read— "there shall be no special legisla-
tion" and then we would know what we were speaking about.
The gentleman from Macoupin was uncharitable to those who
could not comprehend this section, and he had compared them
with the drunken man who thought all others were drunk and he
alone sober. He (Mr. K.) would inform the gentlemen that if they
were drunk on this question they had used a little better liquor
than had John Thompson.

Mr. THORNTON withdrew his amendment.

[Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon said that his desire was to
avoid all inconsistency, and to prevent the possibility of any mis-
conception, and this, he thought, would have been accomplished
by the proposition which he had intended to offer. [Mr. Edwards
read the proposition referred to.] His proposition was entirely
different, he said, from the one now under consideration. It pro-
vided that no charter of incorporation should be granted, nor any
private act passed, when the object could be as well attained by

WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 1847 223

a general law- And the proposition went on to provide that no
private act should be passed at the expense of the State. He held
that there had been an abuse of this power on the part of the legis-
lature, and he thought that the exercise of the power ought to be
restrained. It was true that it would have to be left to the dis-
cretion of the legislature to say what should be considered to be
an act of public necessity, requiring special legislation, as in the
regulation of the police of towns, which was now a custom to be
provided for by general enactment. It had been very properly
said, that it was necessary to restrain legislation in regard to
private enactments. Nine-tenths of the laws at present passed
by the legislature, were purely private acts, in which the people
at large had no interest. His resolution provided that in case of
the application for the passage of a private act, all the expenses
attending it should be borne by the party for whose benefit it
was intended.]'^

Mr. CALDWELL moved to strike out all between the word
"exemptions" and the word "nor," in the last sentence, and to
insert after the word "pass," "any special or private."

Mr. HAYES thought the question, as it presented itself on
these two last amendments, was open for a better discussion than
at any time before, and he hoped gentlemen would express their
views upon it.

The question was taken on the motion to insert, and decided
in the negative; the motion to strike out was also decided in the
negative.

The question then was on the motion to strike out the whole
of the section except part of the last sentence, as made by the
gentleman from McLean, and being taken separately on each
paragraph, was decided in the affirmative.

Mr. GEDDES moved the committee rise. Lost.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to add to the section, "or for collecting
taxes by distress and sale of personal property without judgment."
Carried.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out the whole section as it
now stood; pending which motion, the committee rose, reported

^^This insertion is taken from the Sangamo Journal, July 15.

334 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

&c., and had leave to sit again. And then on motion the Conven-
tion adjourned to 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. Z. CASEY offered the following resolution:
Resolved, That this Convention will adjourn sine die on Friday,
31st inst.

Mr. MARKLEY moved the Convention go into commit-
tee of the whole; decided in the affirmative and the Convention
resolved itself into committee of the whole — Mr. Woodson in the
chair, resumed the consideration of the 31st section of the report
of the Legislative committee.

Mr. LOGAN said as this section was a pet of his friend from
Adams, who was sick, he hoped it would be laid aside for the
present. Agreed to.

Sec. 32. In the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-
five, and every tenth year thereafter, an enumeration of all the
white inhabitants of this State shall be made, in such manner as
shall be directed by law; and the number of senators and repre-
sentatives shall, at the first session holden after the returns herein
provided for are made, be apportioned among the several counties
or districts to be established by law, according to the number of
white inhabitants.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to amend by inserting after the word
"law," where it first occurs, the following:

And in the year eighteen hundred and fifty, and every tenth
year thereafter, the census taken by authority of the government
of the United States, may be adopted by the General Assembly as
the enumeration of this State.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon offered the following as a
substitute:

The apportionment of Senators and Representatives shall be
made according to the census, which may be taken by the order
of Congress, next preceding the making such apportionment,
among the several counties or districts to be established by law,
in proportion to the number of white inhabitants.

Mr. WHITNEY opposed the substitute as unfai[r] — in its

WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 1847 335

operation to those counties whose population was increasing,
and advocated the amendment first proposed.

The question was taken on the substitute, and the same was
rejected.

Mr. WILLIAMS suggested that under the proposed amend-
ment, an extra session of the Legislature must be called to appor-
tion the State.

Mr. LOGAN moved to add to the amendment— "said appor-
tionment shall take place at the first regular session of the Legis-
lature after the census shall be taken;" which was accepted, and
the question being taken on the amendment, it was adopted —
yeas 80, nays 40.

Mr. THOMAS oflFered as an additional section, to come after
section 32, the following:

Senatorial and Representative districts shall be composed of
contiguous territory, bounded by county lines, and only one
Senator allowed to each senatorial, and not more than three
Representatives to any one representative district; Provided, that
cities and towns containing the requisite population shall be divid-
ed into separate districts, but the ratio of representation in such
cities or towns shall be equal to one and a half of that required for
counties, and not more than two Representatives shall be allowed
to each of such districts.

Mr. NORTHCOTT moved to strike out "three," in the pro-
posed section, and insert "one." Lost.

The question was then taken on the section, to the word
"provided;" and it was adopted — yeas 79, nays 40.

Mr. MINSHALL moved to strike out "and town," in the
second clause of the section. Lost. And the question being
taken on the second clause of the section, it was adopted — yeas
74, nays 48.

Mr. THOMAS oflFered, as an additional section:

In forming senatorial and representative districts, counties
containing a population of not more than one-fourth over the
existing ratio shall form separate districts and the excess shall
not be computed, but shall be added together and given to such
county or counties in the same judicial circuit not having a

336 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Senator or Representative as the case may be, which has the
largest white population.

Mr. HARDING oiFered the following as a substitute:

Whenever a county shall be entitled to a separate Senator or
Representative, and has an excess of population over the existing
ratio, such excess, unless it amounts to more than one-fourth of
such ratio, shall be disregarded; and whenever a county has two
Representatives, and has an excess, such excess, unless it amounts
to more than one-half the existing ratio, shall be disregarded.

Mr. HAYES opposed the substitute as unjust, atrocious and
unfair in its provisions, and as depriving one portion of the people
of the right of representation. He opposed any arbitrary rule,
which would restrain the people in having their most sacred right
of representation, and throw away in the apportionment a large
body of the people.

Mr. LOGAN advocated the adoption of the substitute, which
although it might deprive a fraction of the people of a represen-
tative, it would also prevent any apportionment for party purposes,
by the dominant party in the Legislature. He alluded to the
apportionment made by the Legislature in 1840, when counties in
reference to the state of parties had been tacked together, for the
purposes of securing a political majority. He cited several cases
of this kind, particularly the joining of Randolph and Monroe
counties.

Mr. CALDWELL moved to lay the substitute on the table.

The CHAIR decided the motion out of order.

Mr. CALDWELL said, he would vote against the proposition
and the substitute because he deemed them unjust and oppressive.
Unjust because it deprived a part of the people of the right of
representation, and of a sacred franchise.

Mr. SERVANT advocated the substitute, as it prevented such
iniquitous and atrocious apportionment as had been made by the
Legislature in 1840. He alluded to the case of attaching Randolph
and Monroe, which had been put into one district, for party
purposes; and that democrats had acknowledged that such was
the object.

Mr. HAYES. The secret is out. The object of this rule has
been divulged — it is the welfare of the universal whig party! If

WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 1S47 337

that apportionment was iniquitous, it was in the power of the
Legislature to alter and change it. Mr. H. pursued the subject
at some length, and alluded to the fact, that a few days ago the
gentlemen were loud in their condemnation of party spirit in the
Convention, and that they desired it should be dispersed, like the
mists of morning before the rising sun. But now their song had
changed, and their object was to secure whig representatives in
the Legislature, which might be defeated if this rule was not
adopted. — Mr. H. argued at some length on the subject, and in
opposition to a rule which had been admitted to be unjust and
unfair.

The discussion was continued by Messrs. Davis of Mont-
gomery, TuRNBULL, Geddes, and Logan, in favor of the substitute,
and in disclaiming for their party, the introduction of party
spirit; and by Messrs. Brockman, Davis of MAssac and Hayes,
in reply.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin agreed with the gentleman from
Sangamon, that it was right to restrain a dominant party from
doing evil, but he differed from him in the mode of so doing.
Not one of the advocates of the rule insisted that the principle
contained in it was just or correct; they did not deny that it will
disfranchise part of the people. He had illustrated this same
thing a few days ago, when the same principle was before them,
by showing that a county might lack one vote, or a fourth of the
fraction, and thus lose its representation. The gentlemen from
Sangamon and Morgan this morning were in favor of leaving the
legislature unrestrained — of giving them full rope, but now they
introduce a proposition which they acknowledge is based on a
false principle, and desire that it be incorporated into the
Constitution, which will prevent the Legislature from so appor-
tioning the State as to give all the people a representation.

Mr. POWERS moved the committee rise and report progress.
Carried. The committee had leave to sit again; and then, on
motion, the Convention adjourned.

XXVI. THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847
Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Barger.

PERSONAL

Mr. HAYES said,

Mr. President, I would ask the attention of the Convention
to a matter personal to myself. I wish to correct a newspaper
misrepresentation.

I find in the Shawneetown Gazette, of the 30th of June, a
letter, dated June 17th, 1847, which is known to have been
written by one of the editors of that paper, occupying a seat on
this floor by the courtesy of the Convention. In that letter,
besides some comments which I do not purpose to notice at this
time, I find the following passages: "I must, however, give
Mr. Hayes the advantage of one remark which he made during
the course of his speech (which you will see reported in the
Register) in favor of the poll tax — for he took ground in its favor."
But having gone thus far in approving the effort itself, let me now
introduce for your reflection, one sentiment with which he
ornamented it. In advancing the opinion that the people of Illinois
were willing and disposed to pay the tax, he thought it was not
oppressive upon the poor — the poorer classes owed it as a duty to
their government to submit to this tax — they now paid no tax to
support the government, (the rich paid it all) — and they (the
poor) were therefore a parsimony upon the bounty of the rich." So
much of this letter as purports to be a report of the remarks which
I made upon the poll tax, is an entire misrepresentation, both of
my language and its spirit. I did not discriminate invidiously
between different portions of our people. I did not say, "they
(the poor) now paid no tax to support the government, the rich
paid it all." I did not use the language, printed in italics, "they
(the poor) were, therefore, a parsimony upon the bounty of the
rich." Nor did I use any expression which could be construed
into such ridiculous nonsense. The obvious effect of this letter is
338

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 339

to create the impression that my speech was an abusive harangue
against poor men.

It is true I have never played the demagogue or claimed to be
the especial champion of the poor, either on this floor or elsewhere;
but I submit it to every member of this Convention whether I
have at any time ridiculed poverty. I have experienced its dis-
tresses, and know how to sympathize with those who suffer them,
and would be the last to say anything in disparagement of them.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that in that paper — the
Shawneetown Gazette — there had appeared an article in relation
to himself; though he cared nothing for what was said n any
paper, he took occasion to say, that the article alluded to was
unqualifiedly, prematured and basely false, in every part, from
beginning to end.

The reading of the newspaper article was called for by many
members, and was read by the secretary. It consisted of a number
of letters, purporting to give an account of the proceedings of the
Convention. After the reading,

Mr. DAVIS of Massac said, that he had risen not only to
complain of the injustice of that report in relation to himself, in
the misstatement it contained in reference to what he had said on
the subject of a poll tax, but of some things said in it which re-
flected on the character of this body, and which might require
some action on the part of the Convention. He said, that the
remarks made by him on the question of a poll tax were misrepre-
sented, wholly misrepresented, by that reporter.

Mr. KNOWLTON said, that he desired to say a few words in
relation to this matter. In the preceding number of that paper
just read he had come in for a larger share of abuse than had been
dealt out to any other member. The reporter had represented
him as saying that the heroes who had fought from Bunker Hill
to Yorktown never murmured at taxation, with some comments
upon my knowledge of history and acquaintance with dictionaries
and Murray's grammar. He would say to that man, whose form
he had seen moving about the hall, that there was one book which
he (the reporter) had never opened, and that book was the history
of truth, that to him was a sealed book, the language therein was
to him unknown ! Mr. K. cared nothing about what a man writes

340 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

in the papers concerning him; for if those letters should be copied
into the papers at his home, he thought his friends knew enough
of him to disregard them; and he would have said nothing now
unless this subject had been introduced, and because he thought
this due to set himself right in the eyes of strangers. Any man
who is permitted to sit in this hall, and states in regard to the
members what is false, basely, maliciously false, and then turns
round and attacks the Convention as a body, is unworthy to be
allowed here, and almost too low to notice.

I would say to that man, that when he advises the Convention
to adjourn to the other State house, twenty miles above St. Louis,
that it would be more proper for him to go there and engage in the
works of that place, and give us the benefit of his example.

Mr. KITCHELL thought that the writer of those letters was
unworthy of the least notice on the part of the Convention or of
its members.

Mr. CALDWELL rose to make an inquiry. He thought that
it was advisable that the name of the writer should be known. It
had been said that he sits at a desk on this floor, and it is presumed
that his name is known to the President.

No reply being made, the subject dropped.

Mr. SERVANT presented a petition from a number of citizens
of Kaskaskia, in relation to commons; referred to the select
committee on that subject.

Mr. Z. CASEY, from the committee on the Revenue, to whom
had been referred the communication of the Auditor and certain
documents in relation to the amount of county revenue, &c.,
reported the same back, and asked to be discharged from the
further consideration of the same. Agreed to, and laid on the
table.

Mr. PRATT offered as an additional rule — that no member
shall be allowed to speak on any one subject longer than 30 minutes
at one time. A motion to lay it on the table was lost — yeas 34,
and the question being taken on its adoption, it was decided in
the affirmative — yeas 84.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to amend the i8th rule, by striking
out that portion which allows members, in committee of the
whole, to speak more than twice on any subject. After a short

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 341

debate, in which Messrs. Pratt, Markley, Brockman, Allen,
and Z. Casey advocated the- motion, and Messrs. Minshall,
Thompson, Hurlbut, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Davis of McLean,
and Kinney of Bureau, opposed the motion, the question was
taken by yeas and nays, and resulted — yeas 58, nays 78.

[Mr. PRATT advocated its adoption. He was not disposed,
he said, to place any improper restraint upon discussion, but he
would suggest the fact that nearly two-thirds of the time in com-
mittee of the whole, was occupied by six or eight gentlemen,
prompted apparently by an ambition to lead. There was no
doubt whatever about the salutary nature of free and full discus-
sion, but so far from having a free interchange of thoughts and
opinions the debate as he had observed, was chiefly confined to
a few gentlemen, to the exclusion of those who were less ambitious,
but whose opinions he had no doubt, were of as much value as
those which they were forced to hear so frequently reiterated.
He thought that unless gentlemen who were so prominent in de-
bate on all occasions had a greater fund of thought than had yet
been developed they would experience no difficulty whatever in
affording all the light, and in shedding all the intelligence which
it was in their power to furnish upon any given subject, without
speaking more than once. He trusted it would not be supposed
that he offered these remarks in a censorious spirit, but he con-
fessed that he had found it very irksome to listen to so many
editions of the same speech, and in order to avoid, if possible, a
repetition of the evil which he thought had become sufficiently
apparent to all, he was in favor of the motion of the gentleman
from Fulton.

Mr. MINSHALL said, he was not a talking man himself, and
was not much in favor of long speeches, at the same time he could
not see that much advantage would result from the alteration of
this rule. It was one which had been in practice he believed, from
time immemorial, ever since anything like deliberative bodies had
been known. If gentlemen were not disposed to listen to much
speaking they might attain their object by refusing to go into
committee of the whole.

342 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The debate was continued by- Messrs. Palmer of Macoupin,
Allen, Thompson, Markley, Mason and Brockman.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, he hoped the motion
would not prevail; he was opposed to it for the same reason that
he was opposed to the resolution which had been passed this
morning limiting the duration of the speeches of delegates to
thirty minutes each. He was opposed to it because he did not
desire to see any innovation made upon the principles of parlia-
mentary law, which had been established and confirmed by the
wisdom and experience of ages.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean said, he believed the rule which had
been adopted restricting the speeches of members to thirty min-
utes, had passed without attracting the notice of the convention
generally. He was of opinion that if it had been reflected upon
it would not have been adopted. He did not suppose that he
would himself desire to occupy more than thirty minutes at one
time, but he protested against the assumption that no gentleman
in the convention would need a longer time to express his views
upon certain subjects. There were subjects to be discussed with
which some gentlemen were pre-eminently familiar; subjects to
which they had devoted their lives, and upon which they were
qualified therefore to enlighten the convention; but it would be
in vain to expect anything like a full elucidation of the subject if
the speaker was limited to thirty minutes. They were assembled
for the purpose of consulting together upon the common good and
of bringing their labors to a certain result, and before a single
article of the constitution had been adopted, before they had com-
pleted one solitary item of their work a proposition was introduced
that the convention should adjourn in the space of about three
weeks. He must be permitted to say that if a proposition of this
kind had come from a young man he would have considered that
it had been brought forward for the purpose of making capital at
home, but coming as it did from a gentleman of established stand-
ing and reputation, a gentleman who held so large a share in the
estimation of the community as did the gentleman from Jefferson,
he could not of course suppose that it proceeded from any such
motive. Would it be within the range of possibility to get through

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 343

in three weeks? He certainly thought it would not. The Louisi-
ana convention, consisting of seventy members, were engaged for
four months and a half in forming the constitution of that State.
The New York convention was in session one hundred days, and
they acknowledged that they had not time sufficient to perfect
their work. He believed that if in three months time they suc-
ceeded in framing a good constitution, it would be considered by
everybody that they had done well; but if they adjourned within
three weeks and made an imperfect constitution, as must nec-
essarily be the case, they would have done worse than nothing.
The sessions of the legislature although they recurred every two
years lasted three months, and yet this convention which was
assembled for the purpose of forming an organic law to last for
centuries, was expected to complete its work in a few weeks. He
was opposed to all propositions to adjourn until they had finished
the work which they came to perform.

After some remarks from Mr. KINNEY of Bureau,
Mr. Z. CASEY observed that he did not desire to continue this
discussion, but merely to make a single remark in reply to the
gentleman from McLean. He was sincerely desirous that the
labors of the convention should merit and receive the approba-
tion of their constituents, and in order that they might merit and
receive that approbation, he thought they should be performed
within a reasonable time. It seemed to him that it should be one
object, at least with the convention, to do up the business for
which they were assembled, within a reasonable time. He was
inclined to the belief, and he thought that almost any gentleman
would concur with him in this, that if the mode of discussion which
had been hitherto pursued in this body, were to be continued
through all the ramifications of the various subjects to be con-
sidered, they would find themselves sitting for the next eighteen
months. He was perfectly sincere when in offering the resolution
yesterday upon the subject of adjournment, he had stated that
before he had left home he believed the business of this conven-
tion might be finished in six weeks. He was now convinced that
it could not under two months; but he was inclined still to believe
that if gentlemen would confine themsleves within reasonable
bounds in debate, it could be concluded without exceeding two

344 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

months. He would inform the gentleman from McLean that he
had no desire to act for bunkum. He had no future aspirations,
here or elsewhere, to be gratified. He desired to see the conven-
tion form a constitution that would be acceptable to the people, and
that would tell upon the future destinies of the State; but he was
convinced that if they sat there for six months, engaged in this
wild (perhaps he had better take that word back,)— in this wide
range of debate that had been indulged in, he doubted very much
whether they would be able to succeed at all in accomplishing the
object for which they were assembled. He thought, therefore, it
would be better that they should be confined to a reasonable time
for finishing the work; and he was convinced that in this way it
would be more satisfactorily accomphshed. He, for one, was for
expediting the business of the convention, and in order to do this,
they ought to limit the duration of the session to a reasonable
time.

Mr. SINGLETON said he was opposed to any rule that would
restrict in any degree the expression of opinion . . . uld be glad

to see a rule adopted, if now in existence, whi ... .to

the ques- admit, been .... only if

made which had not shed new light upon the questions discussed.
He was for a full and free discussion. He had not come here for
the purpose of saving time. If that had been the object of the
constituency of this body, they would have refrained from send-
ing them here. If time and expense were what they wanted to
economize, the convention would not have been called together.
They had in view a higher purpose; they were assembled for the
purpose of amending and improving the organic law of the State;
for the purpose of changing and improving their form of govern-
ment. This was a matter to be done with very great deliberation.
He would ask if any gentleman would be prepared to decide upon a
question from merely hearing it read at the clerk's table? Some
gentlemen after having expressed their own opinions, would no
doubt be quite willing that the question should be taken without
further debate; but he for one was not disposed to constitute him-
self the judge as to when a question had been sufficiently debated;
the constituents of other gentlemen had reposed confidence in
their discretion, and he might be permitted to say in their talking

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 345

powers, to do something for them — something to forward their
views and to promote their interests, and he was not for depriving
them of the opportunity of exercising these powers; and if it were
to take until December, he was for giving to every member an
opportunity to express his views upon every subject that was to
be determined upon. He hoped the proposition would not be
adopted.]"

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison presented the following preamble
and resolutions:

Whereas, we have just learned, with deep emotion, that the
remains of Col. J. J. Hardin and Capt. Jacob Zabriskie have
reached St. Louis, and that preparations have been made to inter
them with funeral honors at Jacksonville; and whereas, these
events excite afresh the grief with which every heart was pene-
trated when the mournful intelligence of their fall on the bloody
field of Buena Vista was first spread among us; and whereas,
it is the custom of all civilized nations to honor their illustrious
dead, and especially those who have gallantly fought and [who] glo-
riously fell in the service of their country; and whereas, it is deemed
highly right and proper in itself, as well as promotive of the spirit
which ought to animate a free people, that we should commemo-
rate, if not by costly monuments, at least by a spontaneous ex-
pression of feeling, the heroic deeds and manly virtues of the
deceased; it is, therefore, by this Convention,

Resolved, That we do cordially sympathize with the friends and
families of the slain, who, by this awful visitation, have sustained
a loss which all the honors of the world cannot deprive of its
bitterness.

Resolved, That we sincerely mourn the loss of the State, in the
death of Hardin, Zabriskie, Houghton, and others who have so
largely contributed to the lustre of her arms and the glory of her
name.

Resolved, That in the death of Col. Hardin, we sincerely mourn
the loss sustained by the State, in being deprived of a citizen who
has deservedly acquired the affections of the people, and a states-

^'This insertion is taken from the Sangamo Journal, July 15.

346 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

man, whose distinguished ability and integrity were justly admired
by all.

Resolved, That this Convention, in honor of those who have so
gloriously fallen in the service of their country, do adjourn so soon
as information is received of the arrival of the remains of the
deceased at Jacksonville, for the purpose of joining in the cele-
bration of the funeral ceremonies of the lamented Hardin and
Zabriskie.

Mr. EDWARDS in presenting the above resolutions said:

The preamble and resolutions, which I have had the honor to
submit for the consideration of the Convention, explain themselves.
We are not called upon, by the tenor of these resolutions, to testify
our high sense of the important services of the living heroes of the
Mexican war, to tender to them our congratulations for the
splendid victories achieved by their valor, or to cheer them onward
in their brilliant career of glory and renown; but to render a mourn-
ful tribute to the memory of those gallant spirits who have fought
and bled and died in their country's cause, to mingle our tears
with those of their desolate friends, their stricken widows and their
bereaved orphans. We are not allowed the pleasing task of
weaving the crown of unfading laurel to invest the brows of the
living Taylor, Scott, Wool, Baker, Bissell, Morrison,
Leavitt, Pope and a hundred others who have encircled, with a
halo of glory, the American name; but to perform the sad office of
entwining the cypress wreath in mournful remembrance of the
dead -Hardin, Zabriskie and Houghton.

As for myself, Mr. President, I find it vain to attempt to
analyze my own feelings. I know not, indeed, what feeling, at
this moment, predominates in my own bosom. But, this I do know,
that when I would rejoice with the living, I am ready to weep for
the dead — when I would sound the note of congratulation, it is
hushed in the sadness of sorrowful condolence. And such, I
doubt not, are the mingled emotions of this Convention. It is
right, sir, that it should be so. It is right to contemplate the
desolating havoc of war, blighting the rich fruits of peace and
prosperity, spreading sorrow and dismay throughout the land,
scathing the widow's heart, and withering the orphan's hope. It
is right, too, to soften these manifold horrors of war, by the soothing

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 347

influence of sympathy, to dry up the tears of mourning friends, to
mitigate the sorrows of the widowed wife and to light up the beam
of hope in the languid eye of orphanage. And what so well
calculated to dry up those tears, to alleviate those sorrows, and
to enliven those hopes, as to point them to the noble bearing of the
lamented dead — to the deathless fame that awaits them; that the
husband, father, brother, friend is not dead, but lives enshrined
in the hearts of his countrymen. Death, which comes to all, has
come to them with a crown of imperishable honors. Their names
are not only the theme of contemporary praise, but enrolled on
the page of history, as a memento, to their latest posterity of their
illustrious lineage. Where, sir, is the sting of such a death? To
behold the gush of sympathy in the tearful eyes all around her, to
hear the admiring accents, poured forth as the spontaneous tribute
of both whig and democrat, to the memory of her honored husband.
Is not all this a healing balm to the crushed spirit of the accom-
plished widow of the ever to be lamented Hardin? May it prove
an all-sufficient solace to her bleeding heart. HARDIN! A
name ever to be remembered. The name of John J. Hardin will
never, can never, be forgotten by him who now addresses you.
Sir, I knew him well. He was my friend, personal and political,
through good and through evil report. I knew him as the husband
and the father amid the endearments of the family circle. I knew
him as the light and life of the social party, diffusing a joyous
hilarity through every bosom. I knew him as a neighbor, dis-
charging all the kind offices of that relation in a spirit of courtesy,
of generosity, of open-hearted hospitality. I knew him in the
halls of legislation as the bold, manly, independent, consistent
politician — alike beloved by his friends, and respected by his
opponents; for enemies he had none. And we all know him as the
ardent patriot, the gallant soldier — ever the first to advance, and
the last to retreat; a soldier by right of inheritance, mingling in
his veins the best blood of the Hardins and Logans, the bravest of
the brave sons of Kentucky. His devotion to his country is
written with his blood and sealed with his life. —

But, in mourning the loss of our beloved Hardin, shall we forget
those choice spirits of Kentucky, McKee and Clay, worthy sons
of noble sires— or that distinguished scion of revolutionary stock,

348 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the chivalrous Lincoln — or the valiant Yell, who, at his country's
call, forsook the halls of Congress, for the tented field: all of whom,
mingling in the hottest of the fight, and, by their deeds of noble
daring, shedding such a lustre upon the name and character of the
nation — have, side by side with our Hardin, offered up their
lives as a sacrifice upon the altar of their country.

And, Mr. President, as citizens of Illinois, knowing and
appreciating their worth, shall we be said to disparage these great
names by associating with them, in mournful remembrance the
names of our fellow citizens, Zabriskie, Hough ton,Fletcher, Robbins,
Ferguson and others ? Though moving in an humbler sphere, their
hearts were warmed with a glow of patriotism as intense, and
their hands were nerved by a spirit as dauntless. They fought as
bravely, bled as freely, and died as gloriously. Honor to their
memories, and the solace of our heart-felt sympathies to their
mourning relatives.

But, sir, what could not be achieved by such officers, sustained
by such soldiers as were under their command? It were invidious
to discriminate where all have proved themselves so worthy.
And yet, may I not as a Kentuckian, be pardoned for alluding to
the gallant Kentucky regiment, led on by their brave and chival-
rous commanders McKee and Clay? Does not the number of
slain in this memorable action attest their indomitable courage?
Have they not proved themselves true scions of the old stock who
watered the plains of Raisin with [t]heir blood, and who boldly
bared their bosoms to the murderous tomahawk and scalping
knife, of the ruthless savage at Tippecanoe? Sir, the spirit which
animated them in their death struggle for liberty, was breathed
into them by the soul-stirring eloquence of McKee and Henry
Clay, in the halls of Congress. And these, their noble hearted
sons, and their brave companions in arms — fired by the same
spirit and borne onward by the same impulse — have as freely
watered with their blood, the field of Buena Vista, and have as
deservedly won for themselves and for their native State, an im-
perishable fame.

And now, Mr. President, I ask not your indulgence, I crave
not the pardon of this Convention, for placing side by side with
this gallant Kentucky regiment the no less gallant ist and 2nd

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 349

regiments of Illinois volunteers — nor for claiming for them as high
honors and as imperishable renown. As nobly have they earned
it — for they have poured out their blood as freely upon the same
field. Their loss, too, equally attests their invincible courage and
their devoted patriotism. Add to these, sir, the brilliant achieve-
ments of the 3d and 4th regiments at Cerro Gordo, led on success-
fully by the gallant Shields, and by the high-spirited, the chivalrous
Baker, both favorite sons of Illinois — and is not the measure of
our glory full to overflowing? Sir, proud as I may be of the name
of Kentuckian, I feel this day no less proud of the name of Illinoian ;
and have chosen it as the State of my adoption, I ask for me and
mine no higher privilege than that of living and dying an Illinoian.
And to whom, sir, am I, and you, and all the members of this
Convention, indebted for this just sentiment of State pride? To
whom do we owe it that Illinois stands this day, foremost in the
estimation of all the States of this glorious confederacy? To those
very names whom we are called upon by the resolutions under
consideration, to go in a body and convey to their last resting
place on earth. And shall we hold back when a neighboring city,
in a neighboring State, is pouring forth its thousands to pay the sol-
emn tribute of their respect, when all, the high and the low, the rich
and the poor, the aged and the young, the native and the foreigner,
the men of all parties, trades and professions, are gathering in
mournful procession around the bier, not of citizen soldiers of St.
Louis or of Missouri, but of our own Hardin, Zabriskie, and
Houghton? Sir, we ought not, we will not, we cannot, fail in
meeting the invitation of the citizens of Jacksonville to unite with
them in this last sad homage to the memory of our beloved Hardin,
and his brave associates.

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Jo Daviess, presented the following
resolution; which was unanimously adopted:

Resolved, That this Convention, in testimony of their deep
sense of the loss the State has sustained, in the death of the
lamented Hardin, and other volunteers who have fallen in the
service of their country, will wear crepe on the left arm for 30 days.

In offering the above resolution Mr. C. said, that after the
eloquent remarks just made by the venerable and eloquent gentle-
man from Madison, which had sunk deep as the untimely^sorrow

350 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

for the illustrious dead, in the heart of every delegate, he feared
that what he could say would rather disturb than deepen the
feeling.

We see, sir, that in other states, that in the patriotic city of
St. Louis, that they think, and they have a right to think, the
glory of the name of Hardin and his companions, belongs not alone
to their own State, but that it sheds a halo round our national
glory. On this question all party spirit is forgotten! All party
asperities are lost sight of as we kneel in sympathy and patriotism
and shed tears of sorrow upon the graves of those who have fallen
in the cause of their country. This resolution is offered not in
ostentation; the occasion requires it, patriotism demands it, and I
sincerely hope the Convention will adopt it.

Mr. BROWN offered the following; which was unanimously
adopted:

Resolved, That copies of the foregoing preamble and resolutions
signed by the President and Secretary, be transmitted by the
Secretary, to the families of the deceased.

Mr. KNOWLTON said, that from what had just taken place,
and the deep feeling excited in every breast, he knew the Conven-
tion were unfit for business. Our thoughts now are not here,
they are upon the battle field of Buena Vista and Cerro Gordo!
And the Convention was not in a state of feeling to transact
business, he, therefore, moved the Convention adjourn till 3 p. m.
And the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. SINGLETON moved leave of absence for his colleague,
Mr. Brockman, for six days, on account of sickness n his family.
Granted.

Mr. ARCHER moved the Convention go into committee of
the whole; and the committee resumed the consideration of the
report of the committee on the Legislative Department — Mr.
Woodson in the chair. The question pending was on the sub-
stitute offered by Mr. Harding for the additional section pro-
posed by Mr. Thomas.

Mr. ARCHER said, he desired to say a few words on the
question now before the committee, and would give his reasons

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 351

why he should vote against the substitute and the proposed
section. He had some difficulty at first in arriving at the proper
view of and in coming at the proper conclusion and construction
of the proposition of the gentleman from Warren; and he yet felt
some difficulty in doing so. The substitute proposed that, when
a county had a fractional excess over one-fourth of the ratio, that
that excess should be given to the county in the circuit having the
largest white population. There seemed to him to be no sort of
propriety in adding this excess to that county having the largest
white population in the circuit, when that county might have
enough without the fraction to entitle it to a representative. He
thought the effect of the substitute would be to disfranchise a
large portion of the people of the State, and could not give his
consent to any proposition which would deprive any portion of
the people of the right of representation, or tend to their dis-
franchisement. We may as well, if we deprive them of the right
of being represented in the government, excuse them from paying
any taxes or bearing any of the burdens of government. We are
told that the principle contained in this provision, is not to have
any effect upon the apportionment to be made at the present
time. This argument made no difference with him. If the
principle was wrong, it was no argument in its favor with him to
say that its operation was to be kept for the future, that it was to
be delayed. He understood that the gentleman from Sangamon
supported this proposition; yet if not much mistaken he heard
that gentleman a few days ago read a severe lecture to the gentle-
man from Jefferson, on account of his great distrust of Legislatures.
A great change must have taken place since then in that gentle-
man's views. He made them a long speech, in favor of the legis-
lative department of the government, which he said was the right
arm of the people. And now he is in favor of taking away from
the Legislature the power to apportion the State. He is in favor
of binding it down by an arbitrary rule. He (Mr. A.) thought this
matter should be left open for the Legislature, and not attempt to
do too much, by entering into details. If we entered into details
at all we should do so with great accuracy, but we were not familiar
with the views of our constituents upon all these trifling matters
and he thought it best that they should be left to the Legislature.

352 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

He alluded also to the probability that if this principle of
apportionment were adopted, although it was said that it was not
intended to operate on the present apportionment, that gentleman
in order to preserve consistency, might endeavor to make this
rule apply to the present apportionment.

Mr. POWERS could never recognize the justice of any rule
which would deprive the people or any part of them of the right
of representation. Population is generally admitted to be the
only true basis of representation, and any rule going to deprive
any part of the population of the privilege of being represented,
was, in his opinion, wrong. He referred to the present state of
things in relation to Highland and Adams counties, and said, that
he did not believe that this rule, admitted by those who introduced
it to be arbitrary and unfair, would be at all satisfactory to the
people of Adams county. He had examined facts in respect to
the operation of this rule, and had ascertained that there were
twelve counties in the State that would have an average excess of
two thousand white inhabitants, over the ratio; and the whole
of this large excess would be entirely unrepresented; and this
excess would be given to the smaller ones. They propose to give
Adams county, with a population of 18,000, two representatives,
and throw the large excess over the ratio into a small county
adjoining with a population of 5,058, thereby giving the smaller
county a sufficient number for a representative. Thus, instead
of adding the small county to Adams and allowing them jointly
three representatives, they give the excess to the small county
and give her a representative. The effect is that a county with
19,000 inhabitants is entitled to two representatives; and the
county with 5,058, a little over one-half the ratio, is entitled to
one — making each vote in the small county equal to two in the
larger. How gentlemen can reconcile the injustice of this prin-
ciple with their sense of fairness and justice is more than he could
comprehend.

Mr. BOND and Mr. PALMER of Macoupin followed in
opposition to the substitute.

Mr. HARDING made some remarks in defence of his substi-
tute and then withdrew it.

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 353

Mr. BOND moved to amend the proposed section by striking
out the word "such" and insert the "nearest."

Mr. McCALLEN said, he was opposed to the whole plan. If
any county was to have a member through charity, he thought it
should be given to a small county in preference to a large one.
Much had been said about principle, and long speeches had been
made to prove that all our actions should be guided by principle
alone; and he called on gentlemen to carry out the principle of a
fair and equitable representation, by dividing the State into
seventy-five election districts, without any reference to county
lines, and thus have everyone represented, and avoid all fractions.

The question was then taken on Mr. Bond's amendment, and
decided in the affirmative — yeas 71, nays 39.

Mr. McCALLEN offered an amendment, "that no district
shall have more than one representative." Lost.

The question was then taken on the proposed section of Mr.
Thomas, and decided in the affirmative — yeas 76, nays 49.

Sec. 23- The State may, to meet casual deficits or failures in
revenues, contract debts, but never to exceed in the aggregate
fifty thousand dollars; and no debt for any other purpose, except
to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or defend the State in war,
for payment of which the faith of the State shall be pledged, shall
be contracted, unless the law authorizing the same shall, at a
general election, have been submitted to the people, and have
received a majority of all the votes cast for and against it at
such election.

Mr. ARCHER moved to amend by adding at the end of the
section, "and the Legislature shall provide for the publication,
for three months at least, of each law, before the time of the vote
thereon." And the question being taken thereon, it was decided
in the affirmative — yeas 95.

Mr. KENNER moved to strike out all before the word
"unless," and insert "the State shall have no power to contract
debts."

Mr. SIM oflFered as a substitute for the amendment — strike
out all so as the section will read, ' the State shall have no power
to borrow money, except to repel invasion, suppress insurrection,
or defend the State in war, for payment of which the faith of the

354 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

State shall be pledged, unless the law authorizing the same, and
setting forth the purposes for which the same is borrowed, shall,
at a general election," &c. And the question being taken on
submitting this for the amendment, it was decided in the affirm-
ative.

Mr. EDWARDS moved as a substitute for the amendment to
strike it all out and prefix to the section the following: "The
expenditures of the government for any given period shall never
exceed the amount of revenue authorized by law to be raised in
such period, provided the State may," &c., and strike out the
word "but" in section.

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out the word "period" and
insert "year." Lost. And the question being taken on the
adoption of Mr. Edwards' substitute, it was, on the third count,
carried — yeas 57, nays 54.

Mr. HAYES moved to strike out all of the section after the
word "contracted." Lost.

Mr. SHARPE offered a long amendment, which we had not
time to copy, and which was rejected.

Mr. Shumway, Powers and Peters offered amendments,
which were embodied in the follow[ing] — and added to the sec-
tion: "And provision shall be made at the time of contracting
the debt for the payment of the interest thereon, by revenue to be
raised by tax, or otherwise, for that purpose."

Mr. HAYES moved to add to the amendment: "Provided
that the law authorizing the debt to be contracted shall be sub-
mitted to the people, with the law levying the tax for the same."

Mr. HARVEY moved to add to the first amendment, "which
law shall be irrepealable." Carried. And the amendment of
Mr. Hayes was adopted; and the amendment as amended was
also adopted.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out "contract debts." Lost.

Mr. THORNTON moved to insert after "fifty thousand
dollars," "and the moneys thus borrowed shall be applied to the
purpose for which they were obtained, or to repay the debt thus
made, and to no other purpose." Carried.

Mr. KENNER moved to strike out the words "against it,"

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1847 355

in 5th line, and insert "for members of the General Assemb[l]y;["]
which was adopted.

Mr. LOGAN moved the committee rise. Carried; and the
chairman reported and asked leave for the committee to sit again.
Granted.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

XXVII. FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bergen.

Messrs. HAWLEY and SPENCER presented petitions
praying the appointment of a State superintendant of schools;
referred to the committee on Education.

The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention, a communica-
tion from the Governor, enclosing a statement of the public debt,
which will appear in our next.

Mr. CASEY moved that 1,000 copies [be] printed. 2, 3,
and 5,000 copies were suggested, and voted down; and the first
number was adopted.

Mr. HOGUE moved the Convention resolve itself into com-
mittee of the whole. Carried, and Mr. Woodson took the Chair.

Mr. SHARPE moved to take up the 31st section, which had
been passed over nformally the other day. Lost.

Section 34. No amendment.

Sec. 35. The Legislature shall provide by law that the fuel
and stationery furnished for the use of the State; the copying,
printing, and distributing the laws and journals of the General
Assembly shall be let, by contract, to the lowest responsible
bidder, and that no member of the General Assembly, or other
officer of the State, be interested either directly or indirectly in
any such contract.

Mr. THOMAS moved to insert "binding" after the word
"printing." Carried.

Mr. CHURCHILL moved to insert "lights" after the word
"fuel." Lost.

Mr. NORTHCOTT moved to amend by adding at the end of
the section the words: "no private act shall be printed at the
public expense." Yeas 77, nays 23. No quorum. A second
vote resulted — yeas 57, nays 65. Rejected.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon proposed the same amend-
ment, with the following words added thereto — "unless by a vote
of three-fourths of the General Assembly."
356

FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1847 357

Mr. TURNBULL offered as a substitute — "no private act
shall be published, except at the cost of the party for whose benefit
it is passed." Lost.

And the question being taken on Mr. Edwards' amendment,
it was decided in the negative.

Mr. DAWSON moved to insert "shall" after "State," in 4th
line. Adopted.

Mr. BROWN moved to strike out "copying," in 2d line.
Lost.

Mr. SCATES moved to insert after "journal" — "and all other
printing ordered by." Carried. — Yeas 83.

Mr. BUTLER moved to strike out all of the 35th section.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, he thought the better
way would be to leave this whole question open to the action of
the Legislature, who could fix in the law, authorizing the printing,
binding, &c., a statement of the prices to be paid for the work.
He had some knowledge of this system of letting the work out to
the lowest bidder, and knew from experience, that there would
be no saving to the State. This matter of the binding had been
let out by contract some time ago, to the lowest bidder, and what
was the consequence? Why there were several binders in this
city, yet there was but one bid, and the contract was given to
them at prices but very little less than those before paid, and
stated in the law. There was no competition, men could not come
here from other places, and establish offices for the mere purpose
of obtaining this State work; and he again stated his opinion was
that the question should be left open for the Legislature.

Mr. LOGAN said, he did not agree with the gentleman last
up, in his views of this question. He thought that if a "little"
only was saved, it still was so much saved to the State by this
means. He would point out to the gentleman, that in one case —
the revised code — the contract for binding was let out to the
lowest bidder, and the amount paid was only one-half the price
that was fixed in the law.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess replied, that in the case cited
by the gentleman, the contract was taken at prices so low that the
man could not perform the work without a loss. For, after they
had undertaken the work, and after the adjournment of the Legis-

358 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

lature, they had addressed a letter to the Secretary of State
(Mr. C.) in which they state[d] the prices were too low; that officer
explained to them that they had entered into a contract, and it
was not in his power to annul it. If he was not much mistaken,
the gentleman from Sangamon (Mr. Logan) introduced, at
the next session of the Legislatu[r]e, a bill for the relief of these
contractors, in consequence of their losses by this contract.

Mr. LOGAN explained, that the bill for relief had been
introduced because there was a difference in the kind of binding
done, from what had been contracted for. The relief was given.
They also had petitioned for relief in consequence of the amount
of binding done was not as great as was anticipated when the
contract was taken, for this however they received no relief. He
said this much in explanation of his course in the Legislature.

Mr. WEAD said, it was a matter of regret that we should
have to hear explanations of the gentleman's legislative course so
often; and it was also a source of much greater regret that it had
not been published in a book, so that we should not be obliged to
hear it at the expense of the people.

It had been shown by the gentleman from Jo D. that nothing
could be saved in the end by this plan of having the binding and
printing done, and he could see no objection to leaving the matter
open to the Legislature, to be provided for by them. Gentlemen
had opposed all restrictions on the Legislature, had declared that
with this Convention had not been exhausted the wisdom of the
State, and that we should go into details. But now, gentlemen
say that the legislature shall have no power, no discretion in this
matter, and that we must bind them down by the most strict lines
and provisions? He was in favor, as he had before stated, of
leaving the question with the Legislature.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon said, that in order to meet the
views of gentlemen and to carry out the suggestions of the gentle-
man from Jo D. he would offer the following proviso: "That the
Legislature shall fix in the law a maximum price for such printing,
binding &c."

Mr. BUTLER was in favor of striking the whole section out;
it was a reflection upon the honesty and integrity of all future
Legislatures. To say that they cannot make a contract about

FRIDAY, JULY p, 1847 359

the printing and binding the laws of the State, without wronging
the State was a reflection upon the honor and integrity of the
Legislature. He was not a little amused at the course of the
gentleman from Sangamon, he was afraid a day or two ago that
the Convention was doing too much, that it was legislating and
leaving nothing for Legislatures to do hereafter. To-day he is in
favor and desirous of binding them down by constitutional pro-
visions upon this trifling matter.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery expressed himself in favor of
the section as it is.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey offered the following as a substitute:
"Provided, the Legislature shall have the right to determine
whether the lowest responsible bid, as contemplated in the
section, shall be reasonable in its amount and as low as could be
obtained by private contract." Lost. And the question being
taken on the amendment of Mr. Edwards, it was carried — yeas
76, nays 43. The question was taken on striking out the section,
and decided in the negative.

Mr. SHARPE moved to insert after "bidder," "so that said
bidder is a resident of this State." — Lost.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to re-consider the vote by which
an amendment offered by him on Wednesday last, to the 3d
section, had been lost; and the committee refused to re-consider —
yeas 54, nays 55.

The committee then took up the 31st section as it was amended;
which had been laid over.

Mr. SHARPE offered the following as a substitute for the
section as amended: "The Legislature shall not have power to
provide by law for the sale of non-residents' lands for taxes, until
judgment shall first be had against the same."

Messrs. Sharpe, Williams, Davis of Montgomery, and
ScATES made some remarks thereon, after which a motion was
made that the committee rise; which was decided in the negative —
yeas 40, nays not counted.

Mr. ARCHER hoped the vote would not now be taken on
this amendment, till the members had had sufficient reflection
on the subject. He renewed the motion to rise — yeas 60, nays 61.
Lost.

36o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The question was taken on the amendment, and decided in
the negative.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to insert after the word "process,"
the words "or otherwise."

Mr. McCALLEN was not ready to vote upon the question
now, and he renewed the motion that the committee rise.

Mr. PETERS thought we might vote now upon this section
now and report it to the house, have it printed, and then members
could have time to vote deliberately upon its adoption. The
motion to rise was decided in the negative.

Mr. WILLIAMS' amendment was then adopted.

Mr. LOGAN moved to insert after "court," "in some usual
and regular tribunal." Carried.

The section then stood as follows:

"The General Assembly shall have no power to pass any law
whereby any person shall be deprived of his life, liberty, property,
or franchises, without trial and judgment in court, or some usual
and regular tribunal; provided, that nothing herein contained shall
prevent the passage of any law for seizing and holding persons
and property by mesne process or otherwise until such trial can
be had; or for collecting taxes by distress and sale of personal
property without judgment."

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the committee rise and report to the
Convention their proceedings; and the chairman reported, the
committee had had under consideration, &c., and reported the same
back with various amendments, and asked the concurrence of the
Convention therein.

Mr. THOMAS moved the report and amendments be laid on
the table, and 200 copies printed. Carried.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved the Convention resolve itself
into committee of the whole; and the Convention resolved itself into
committee — ;Mr. Crain in the chair — and took up the report of
the committee on the Executive Department.

Sec. I. No amendment.

Sec. 2. Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to amend by providing

FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1S47 361

that the next Governor shall commence his term on the 2d Monday
in January, 1849, and the next in January, '53, and every tour
years thereafter, &c. Carried.

Mr. DALE moved to strike out"i853"and insert"i850." Lost.

Sec. 3. The Governor shall hold his office for the term of
four years, and until another Governor shall be elected and
qualified; but he shall not be eligible for more than four years in
any term of eight years.

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to amend by prefixing thereto
the following:

"The first election of Governor shall be held on the first
Monday in November, 1848, and the next election shall be held
on the first Monday of November, 1852, and forever thereafter
elections for Governor shall be held once in four years on the first
Monday of November."

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to strike out all after
"qualified." Lost.

Mr. FARWELL opposed the amendment as it put the present
Governor out of office before the expiration of his term. The
question being taken the amendment was adopted.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to add to the section
"nor any other officer till the expiration of the term." Carried.

Sec. 4. No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen
of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution,
shall be eligible to the office of Governor; neither shall any person
be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of
thirty-five years, and been ten years a resident within this State.

Mr. PRATT moved to strike out the section and insert the
following; which was lost:

"No person except a citizen of the United States, and who
shall have been a resident of this State for the pe[riod] of five
years next preceding his election, shall be eligible to the office of
Governor; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who
has not attained to the age of thirty years."

Mr. LEMON moved to strike out "thirty-five," and insert
"forty-five." Lost.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out the words "a natural born
citizen, ["] and "at the time of the adoption of this constitution."

362 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. HENDERSON was in favor of the amendment of the
gentleman from Jefferson. He thought that the article as it
stood now would exclude many individuals worthy the office,
from being chosen by the people. There were several cases where
the exclusion, contemplated by this section, would operate un-
justly; one of these was in the case a person came here when a
child, was raised here, with all the feelings and sentiments of an
American, and he would be excluded from office. He saw no
necessity for the restriction and hoped the amendment would be
adopted.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said that he rose, not for the
purpose of making a speech, but merely to say that when this
question would come before them properly for action, and when
the ayes and noes could be called, then this section shall not pass
without a contest. This section as reported by the committee is
a "Native American" principle carried into effect. Why was the
old constitution changed? Why was this new theory introduced.
We had not been sent here to break down and destroy the old
constitution, but simply to amend it in such provisions and
particulars as the people desired to have changed. Where — when
did the people ask for this restriction ? Had any petition been sent
to this Convention asking for a change in the constitution?
Which of the States that had adopted new constitutions, had
introduced this restriction upon the right of the people to choose
who they may?

He was in favor of allowing all citizens the same privileges.

Mr. LOCKWOOD said, that the committee had been unani-
mous in their action upon this section, and he knew none of them
to be called "Native Americans." For himself he would say that
he had no prejudice against foreigners, and if the gentleman would
look at the old constitution he will find that this section is more
favorable to them than that.

By the constitution, no foreigner could be eligible to the office
of Governor, until he had been thirty years a citizen of the United
States.

Mr. NORTON said, he did not propose, at the present stage
of this question, to enter into any argument upon it. He should
vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson. He

FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1847 363

should do so for the reason that he would make no distinction
between American citizens whether native or naturalized. He
desired to see no such distinction incorporated into our constitu-
tion. He would desire the people of this country to become in
truth one people, and when foreigners leave their native lands,
and have settled amongst us, he would hold out every honorable
inducement to them, to become Americans in deed, by conforming
to the naturalization laws of the United States, and, when they
have done this, he would offer no obstruction to their advance-
ment in the State. This is what is contemplated by the amend-
ment, and he should therefore vote for it.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, he would vote for the report
as it came from the committee, and would state his reasons for so
doing. The gentleman from Jo Daviess said, that popular opinion
was not in favor of this restriction upon foreigners holding the
highest offices; now he did not know what popular opinion was in
Jo Daviess, but he knew as well as Mr. C. what it was in Bond
and Montgomery, and he was sure he was supporting the popular
opinion of those counties, when he voted for this report. Gentle-
men say that this is placing an unjust restriction upon the citizens
of our country, why did those men of the revolution, those who
signed the Declaration of Independence, and who framed the
federal constitution, introduce this same provision into it, by
prohibiting any but a native born citizen of the United States from
being President? And who desired it to be stricken out? If to
preserve that principle which should be incorporated into our
State constitution, and he who desires it not to be stricken out is a
"Native American," then I am "Native American!" He was
in favor of giving to foreigners, against whom he wasnotprejudiced,
all privileges of our citizens they can properly claim, but not to
the exclusion of Americans; not to raise them above the heads of
our own countrymen, into high and important offices, before they
are sufficiently acquainted with our language to speak it plainly.
They were told that when this question came before them at
another time, that the ayes and noes would be called, if so, he
would not be afraid to record his vote in favor of the report.

Mr. GEDDES said, the friendship expressed for our European
friends who came to our State, reminded him of certain tribes of

364 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Indians, who gave to their guests their wives and daughters to
sleep with. Now, while he was ready and willing to give foreigners
meat and drink, he was not disposed to give up his bed. He was
willing that they should kneel at the same altar with him, but not
to be his priest. He was willing they should live in the country
but not to be his rulers.

Mr. PRATT stated that he had offered his amendment to
effect the same object as proposed by the gentleman from Jeffer-
son, in the amendment now before them, but as it had been voted
down so quickly, he would like now to state his reasons for pre-
senting it. He thought that any restriction like that contained
in the section as reported, was a reflection upon the intelligence
of the people— it doubted in them the capability of selecting their
own rulers, it denied them the right of so doing when their choice
fell upon one whose birth was in a different land. No matter what
public service, what eminent talent; no matter how capable he
might be to perform the duties of the office, he was excluded by
this provision, and the people denied the privilege of elevating
him. There were many cases where its effect would operate
unjustly, and one had been cited by the gentleman from Will,
(Mr. Henderson) of a child who might have been born in a
foreign land, but who had been reared under our fostering insti-
tutions, and who had learned to love and revere them, and, no
matter how eminent and distinguished he might become, was
fortver prohibited from holding the station of Governor of this
State. He had no love for foreigners, but he had ever known
them to make good citizens, men as devo.ted to the interests and
welfare of the country as any others, and as well entitled to the
confidence and respect of the Convention as any other class. The
old constitution was a virtual prohibition of foreigners from
holding the office of Governor. It provided that he should be a
citizen of the United States for thirty years, which, supposing a
foreigner came here at twenty-five years of age, then five years
before he became a citizen, and it would make him sixty years of
age before he was eligible to the office of Governor. — That was
an age at which men seldom aspired to such an office, and they
were, therefore, virtually prohibited. Now if this rule was to be
changed at all, it should be because it was wrong, and if it was

FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1847 365

wrong, why should it be presented in its present shape as a remedy?
Another objection he had to the section was the proposed increase
in the age of the person to fill the office. Thirty-five years was
proposed. Why increase it from thirty, as it stood in the old
constitution? Had any evils resulted from the age being fixed at
that period? He referred the committee to the fact that when
DeWitt Clinton, Daniel D. Tompkins, and Gov. Seward were
chosen Governor of New York, neither had attained the age of Ji'i-
No one had ever complained of these men, or their administrations,
because of their age.

After some further remarks on this subject, he returned to the
subject of foreigners, and said that in the whole thirty States
there were but three that had a provision in their constitutions
like this reported by the committee; and neither of those States
would he cite as an example for this State to follow in the formation
of a government. Not one of the States which had lately formed a
constitution had anything of the kind contained amongst their
provisions. Iowa had not; Louisiana and Michigan had not;
New York had not — her provision is in the very words of his
amendment which had been voted down.

Mr. LOGAN said, that when in order he would offer an
amendment changing the section so that fifteen years citizenship
should be required before a foreigner shall be eligible to the office
of Governor. He was sorry that so much feeling had been shown
on this question, and also sorry that the Convention had been
threatened with the yeas and nays on this question. He had no
fears himself to have his vote recorded, and he did not think that
any others were to be influenced by any such proceeding. He had
no love for foreigners, nor was he prejudiced against them; he
never regarded foreigners in the community as foreigners through
fear, favor or aflPection. He was not disposed to proscribe them,
while at the same time he was unwilling they should have privi-
leges, which, in his opinion and in his conscience, he thought they
were not entitled to. Foreigners are becoming a powerful body
in this Union; in some States they have a great influence, being
what is called the balance of power party, and it was no more than
prudent to guard against danger from an increase of that power
and influence.

366 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

As to the question of age, for Governor, he was not in favor ot
reducing the period below thirty-five years. An age when men
generally arrived at that necessary judgment, capacity and
experience, to enable them to discharge the duties of that high
oifice with fidelity and satisfaction. They had fixed the time for
voting at an age when it was presumed that a man's mind had
become sufficiently matured to be entrusted with that privilege,
and he thought a time should also be fixed at a period when a
similar presumption would exist, that his mind had been formed,
and his judgment and capacity so settled that there would be no
danger in committing to his hands the guidance of the government.
He knew that age did not give more energy to the mind, nor
increase the brightness of the genius, but every day that a man
approached thirty-five he was improving in steadiness, experience
and judgment. It was said that young men had been selected
for this office, and that there were young men in the State who
could fill the office, he would not deny; but it is well known that
boys have, for a long time, their wild oats to sow, and that, gener-
ally, they were more easily influenced by friends and advisers,
and did not possess that stability which age and experience confers.
Exceptions to this rule may be found, but generally such was the
case. Thirty-five years was a low period to fix, and the young
man who has the ability to discharge the duties of that office, will
not be any less qualified when he arrives at that age.

A man may have a good mind, may shine in the Legislative
hall, his genius may display itself with more brilliancy — and his
fancy and imagination may be more exuberant than all others
around him; but for the sober discharge of the important duties of
the chief executive office of the State, more than these are required
— he wants steadiness, calculation, experience and sound judg-
ment. You might as well say that we restrict the right of suffrage,
when we exclude an intelligent boy of eighteen from voting, as to
complain of our excluding a man from the office of Governor until
he has arrived at thirty-five. The same principle applies to both
cases. And so with a foreigner. The man who comes here from
a foreign land knows the policy of the government of England, of
Ireland, and of other countries — and when he comes here, he has
to receive a new education in the principles of government, for

FRIDAY, JULY p, 1847 367

what do they know of the experimental — practical policy of our
government? Now, if it takes a man, as it is said the provision
in the constitution of the United States presumes, five years to
become sufficiently acquainted with our government and institu-
tions, to be entrusted with the privilege of voting, is it unjust or
unreasonable to require that he shall remain here fifteen years
before he can be eligible to an office of so much importance as the
executive of a State. Another thing. He thought the man who
would be selected to fill this office, should have been here a sufficient
length of time for the people to know him, to become acquainted
with his principles, and his character; he might be a man of great
power of speech, of great conversational powers, of great brilliancy
of intellect, and the people should have time to see through all
this, not by a casual view, but by a thorough examination into the
foundation of his character. That time should be given for the
first blush of a bright appearance to wear ofi^, and then the people
to say whether he was worthy of their confidence.

This, he thought could be accomplished by the amendment he
would offer.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess- said, he intended to enter
into no argument upon this subject at the present time. He rose
now, as he had done at first, to ask the committee, before they
decide this question, before they commit themselves even upon
the informal vote here, to pause and reflect, before they
placed any restriction upon their future action, upon the
consequences of this proposed change in the old constitution.
He was in favor of abolishing the restriction of thirty-five years as
a qualification of the office of governor, and in favor of abolishing
all and every distinction, now, or at any time, existing between
the elector and elected. These, sir, are restrictions upon the
people, they are restrictions upon the right of the people to say
who shall be their choice to perform the duties of this office.

He would say that any man at the age of twenty-one years,
should have full power to do that himself which he is authorized
to do by an agent. This restriction says he shall not. It says
that a man can vote for a Governor and shall have the power to
rule by another, at the age of twenty-one years; but it precludes
him from doing so, and the people from choosing him to do the

368 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

same. It says to him you may govern the State by an agent, but
you shall not govern it yourself.

He was in favor of destroying and eradicating from the con-
stitution every restriction upon the free and untrammeled voice
of the people in the choice of their rulers. But it is said that there
is great danger of the people selecting a man for Governor, who is
ignorant, a foreigner, and incompetent to perform the duties
of the station. This is an un-worthy reflection upon the
intelligence and capacity of the people. To say that they have
not intelligence to select men capable and worthy and
deserving of the office, is, he said, a reflection upon their
powers of self-government. Why give them the right to
vote at all, if it was feared they had not the capacity to select?
It is unjust, too, to the naturalized citizen, to exclude him on
account of his birth. Shall it be said in this day that a man who
leaves his native land and the home of his youth— who renounces
all allegiance to his own and all other foreign princes, potentates
and powers — who comes here to live in a land of freedom — who
oflfers himself, and is always ready, to die in the defence of our
stars and stripes — shall we say that he shall not be entitled to
enjoy all the rights and privileges of other citizens of our land?
Mr. C. then alluded to the age required for the office of Governor,
and opposed it as a restriction upon the voice of the people in the
choice of their Governor. He advocated that no age should be
required; but the matter left open to the people. He alluded to
the great disparity of ages in the members of this Convention —
to the old and the young — the impetuosity of youth rising in its
might and struggling for the mastery, and the calm sobriety and
venerable experience of age — blending together, and displaying
the same great and correct principles he had been advocating
when he proposed to open to all, of every age and birth, the rights
and privileges of citizenship, and leaving the people unrestricted
in their free choice.

Mr. BALLINGALL addressed the Convention in favor of the
amendment; his remarks will probably appear hereafter.

Mr. HURLBUT said, that like some others who had spoken,
he did not propose to enter into an argument upon this question,
but merely to say a few words in reply to those who complained

FRIDAY, JULY p, 1847 369

of this section because it was a restriction upon the people. What
is the restriction upon voters in Illinois? Is it not now a rule that
no man shall vote till he is twenty-one years of age, and that is a
restriction upon the right to vote, which he did not suppose gentle-
men desired to abolish.

Mr. BALLINGALL said, that at common law the right to
vote was a privilege secured to a citizen.

Mr. HURLBUT said, he would like to know if that was the
common law of Illinois ? He would like to know if foreigners were
not now allowed to vote and enjoy all the rights of citizenship
upon a mere twelve months' residence in the State?

A Member. They are not allowed to sit on juries.

Mr. HURLBUT. I know they are not called upon to sit on
juries; jury and militia duties are burdens upon citizens — voting
is the privilege! — The right to vote is the greatest that can be
conferred; it is that which makes a man feel that he is a man. In
rising, he had another object, and that was, to say that a well
known individual who represented his district in Congress, had
called him a "Native American," or, at least, certain remarks
made by him had been wholly misrepresented by some small petty
representative of a very small man, and the charge was based
thereon. He was sure that no one who had listened to his remarks
had discovered in them anything of the kind represented, and he
would say to the reporters — no, he would excuse the reporters;
none of them had done it — he would say to the man, be he who he
may, who panders to that small man, that he was at liberty to
state anything he thought proper, which he (Mr. H.) had said;
but that if he undertook to misrepresent, even as humble an indi-
vidual as himself, he would find he had mistaken his man.

The question was then taken on the amendment proposed by
Mr. ScATES, and decided as follows: yeas 74, nays 49.

Mr. LOGAN moved to add to the section, "and shall have
been a citizen of the United States for fifteen years. ["]

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said that he hoped the amend-
ment just proposed by the member from Sangamon would pass.
He would like to have this question settled now. Why was there
so much fear expressed of, and so many warnings against, the
committee committing themselves by a vote on this question?

370 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Why are not the members as well prepared to vote and act now
upon the subject as at any other time? He would always vote
against anything allowing a foreigner to become Governor of
Illinois, of being apipointed a judge of a court, or of holding any
other important post, after having been only five years in the country.
He was not, as he said before, prejudiced against foreigners, but
he would always oppose the system pursued by some, of running
to them the moment they reach our land, and telling them,
"oh, you understand our laws, you understand our governmen[t],
you understand our policy, and you know as much about our
institutions as anybody else, and you must have a vote." Sir,
they know nothing about our institutions; they are familiar with
the political government of the land where they spent their school-
boy days; their minds are stored with recollections and views of
policy imbibed in foreign lands, and they, when they come here,
have no true conception of the character of our institutions. How
can they form an idea of our system of government? They have
not read our books, they have no knowledge of our customs or
laws, and in many cases are ignorant of our language.

We are a progressing people, and our country is fast filling up.
Now is the time to apply these wholesome restrictions, which will
prevent citizens — born and reared on the soil— from being excluded
by foreigners from the enjoyment of these high offices. Shall we
say that those who framed the constitution of the United States
were wrong in imposing a restriction in that instrument excluding
foreigners from holding the two chief offices of the national govern-
ment? Sir, this Convention has this day, by the vote just taken,
and by a large majority, said this restriction imposed in the con-
stitution by the fathers of the country was wrong — all wrong.
He had no fears of expressing his sentiments. He spoke what he
believed to be true and correct. He would read to the Conven-
tion the opinion of Washington on this subject, and upon those
views he would make no comments, for he believed the die was
cast; that the question was settled, and he would not be surprised
if the time was reduced to five years. He then read a letter written
by Gen. Washington to a Mr. Morris during the war, in relation
to foreigners, and one from Mr. Jefferson on the same subject.

He was willing to admit that the circumstances under which

FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1847 37i

those letters were written were different from our present. He
was not a "Native American," but he would say to the Convention
that the want of such restrictions as is contained in that section
now upon the table, had been the cause of such a party in our
country. Foreigners came to our land and remained in our large
cities; they were seized upon by both parties— whig and democrat
• — and for the purpose of forwarding the interests of their respective
parties, were put into high and important offices, to the exclusion
of free American citizens, and whose every feeling was for their
country; — this had driven the people in those cities to unite in
these associations, formed to protect themselves and countrymen
from the encroachments of the foreigners. He had no personal
hostility to any foreigners, but he had seen instances of their being
elevated over the heads of competent Americans and appointed
to judgeships, and one of these was in his own county. He
alluded to Judge Koerner — who was the judge in his circuit,
who was a foreigner, and he alluded to him, not out of any want
of respect, for he was a gentleman, a sound lawyer, and an honor-
able man, but he was unable to charge a jury understandingly,
because his language was so broken and difficult to be understood.

Mr. BUTLER thought this was a restriction upon the people.
Gentlemen would liken it to a restriction upon the Legislature,
but it was very different. The restriction contained in this
amendment was upon the people themselves, and questioned their
capability of judging who should have the offices to be received
at their hands. We might as well say that we should declare in
this constitution all the qualifications the Governor should possess,
and we should say whether he must have received a common
school, an academical, or a collegiate education; whether he should
have a classical education or not; whether he shall be acquainted
with Latin or Greek. This rule, sir, would not be more arbitrary
than that proposed by the gentleman from Sangamon. He thought
that we should place no restrictions in the constitution, but leave
the matter with the people.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell followed in support of the amend-
ment. He thought that the restriction of fifteen years upon a
foreigner was not more oppressive than that placed upon native

372 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

born citizens, who had to be in the country twenty-one years
before they could vote.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall advocated the amendment at
much length; he took similar views as those presented by those
who had preceded him.

Mr. GEDDES repeated the views expressed by him earlier
in the debate.

Mr. ARCHER was opposed to the amendment proposed by
the gentleman from Sangamon. He took the same view of it as
others who had declared it to be a restriction upon the elective
franchise of the people. He had no sort of doubt of the capability
of the people to exercise that right, and was opposed to any pro-
vision restricting it, in the least particular, as he believed it would
be safe in their hands, and that the better course for the Conven-
tion would be to leave the matter entirely with them.

He had no great love for foreigners. He was an American by
birth, but he had always been proud to believe that the institu-
tions of his country afforded a home for the opressed of all lands
without distinction. He thought that the land of a man's birth
was not the test of his right to the privilege of citizenship, but that
merit was the true test to be applied to him. He had no desire
to dwell upon the acts of foreigners who had taken an active part
in our revolution, nor of the many who had rendered such valuable
service, but he would say that he had never heard of an adopted
citizen betraying his country, or of any act unworthy of a citizen.
He did not desire that offices should be open to them as soon as
they arrive in this country, but when they had renounced their
allegiance to other powers, and had remained here for the
term of five years, and complied with all the requirements which
Congress, in their wisdom, had provided as necessary for them to
become citizens, he desired then to see them become citizens with
all the rights and privileges of citizenship without any restrictions
or distinctions, It had been said that they came to this country
with recollections of their native land fresh in their mind, and that
their views and sentiments are influenced by associations of what
they had experienced there. He thought this was true in one
sense. They do come here with a vivid recollection of the land
where they have been oppressed, and minds well calculated to

FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1847 373

appreciate the freedom of our laws and the beauty of our institu-
tions, because of the associations of government and tyranny they
have experienced at home. The amendment would establish that
the land of a man's birth, not the man, should be the test by which
he should be judged. It had well been said, that a man who had
just arrived here, unknown to the people, ignorant or unqualified,
would not be selected by the people for the office of Governor.
Public jealousy, distrust of strangers, will always excite a scrutiny
into the character of any man offering himself for that office, and
no danger need be felt that they would select such a person for
that important office.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin advocated the adoption of the
amendment. He was opposed to the section as it first was report-
ed; but thought that the restriction of fifteen years upon a foreigner
before he could hold the office of Governor was not too great. He
thought those who denounced all restrictions upon the right to
vote and hold office had gone too far. There were restrictions
upon the ladies, precluding them from the enjoyment of these
rights, and he did not think it was proposed by any to remove
them. He thought that the period of five years fixed in the con-
stitution, as the time for a foreigner to reside in this country, had
been fixed as a period in which he might become acquainted with
our language; and did not believe that fifteen years was too long
a term for him to acquire a knowledge of the complicated machin-
ery of our system of government. He thought that the privilege
of living under the government of the United States, and enjoying
the rights and privileges of a citizen of a free republic, should be
sufficient for any foreigner, without the right to hold office.'*

'*The following correction was printed in the weekly Register, July 30:
Springfield, July 27, 1847.
' ' Editors of the Register:

In the report in your paper of the 13th inst. of my remarks upon the
amendment offered by Mr. Logan to the report of the committee on the
Executive Department, by which fifteen years' citizenship is required to
render a foreigner eligible to the office of Governor, I am made to say in the
report, that 'the privilege of living under the government of the United States,
and of enjoying the rights of a citizen of a free republic, should be sufficient
for any foreigner, without the right to hold office.'

The report is incorrect. My language on that occasion was: 'Even
without the privilege of holding office, foreigners gain immensely by their
immigration to this country. Here they live under free and equal laws, rnay
easily acquire an interest in the soil, and can participate in the power belonging

374 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

We have given the above positions of Mr. P., as they are some-
what different from those advanced on the same side, and must
offer as an apology for this brief allusion to his remarks, the crowd-
ed state of our columns.

[Mr. TURNBULL said that the gentlemen who were opposed
to the amendment of the gentleman from Sangamon, (Logan)
from their remarks appear to be in favor of making foreigners
eligible to the office of Governor as soon as they are entitled to a
vote, while they are for preventing the people from electing a
native-born citizen until he has. exercised the right of voting for
fourteen years to that high office. I ask gentlemen, who are
opposed to the amendment, how they will answer to the people of
this State, or to the world, for requiring fourteen years of a native
born citizen — one who has imbibed the first principles of freedom
and republicanism from his mother, after he is entitled to a vote
before he is eligible for the office of Governor — and make the for-
eigner eligible for that high office as soon as he is entitled to a vote?
Mr. President, I shall vote for the amendment of the gentleman
from Sangamon, which requires fifteen years residence in the
United States after he is entitled to a vote, before the foreigner
is eligible for the office of Governor.]^^

Mr. PRATT resumed the subject and spoke at much length
against the amendment and against the restriction upon the
selection of a young man for the office.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved the committee rise.

And the committee rose, reported progress, and asked leave
to sit again. Granted.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

in monarchies to kingS' — a voice in the government of a great people; and
when to this is superadded the fact that, by waiting for a reasonable term
until they can acquire a knowledge of the construction of our complicated
system of government, they may then aspire to the highest offices in the gift
of the people. It seems to me that this amendment should satisfy them; and
under this view, I shall vote; and by such of my constituents as are foreigners,
I am willing to be judged.'

Yours, &c.,

John M. Palmer."

^'TumbuU's remarks are taken from the Sangamo Journal, July IS.

XXVIII. SATURDAY, JULY lo, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Hale.

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole —
Mr. Grain in the chair, and resumed the consideration of the
report of the committee on the Executive Department.

The question pending was on the amendment of Mr. Logan,
which was modified by him to read "fourteen" instead of "fif-
teen" years, and being take[n] was decided in the affirmative.

Mr.MARKLEY gave notice of a motion to reconsider the vote.

Sec. 5. The Governor shall, at stated times, receive for his
services the sum of twelve hundred and fifty dollars per annum;
which shall neither be increased nor diminished (during the period
for which he shall have been elected;) and he shall not receive,
within that period, any other emolument from the United States
or any of them.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to strike out "^1,250" and insert
"? 1,000."

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to amend the amendment by
striking out "|i,ooo" and inserting — two dollars a day for the
first forty-two days, and one dollar a day, for each days actual
service thereafter; which amendment was carried; and the
question being taken on the amendment as amended it was
decided in the negative.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey offered the following as a substitute for
the section:

"That the Governor shall receive the sum of fifteen hundred
dollars per annum, for his services as Governor, and which sum
shall not be increased nor diminished."

Mr. DALE moved, as an amendment to the amendment, to
strike out "fifteen hundred dollars," and insert "one thousand."

In presenting the amendment Mr. D. said, that it behooved us,

in view of the present pecuniary embarrassments of the State,

to study economy — to introduce it into every department of

government — and to act with an eye to it, in all our proceedings.

375

376 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The people have clamored loudly, and with justice, against the
heavy expenses of government; and gentlemen, here, would bear
him out in the assertion, that, whilst we had a soil which yielded
its fruits with less of labor and toil of man than did the same
amount of territory anywhere else; whils[t], too, our harvests
were, generally, very abundant, and our farms daily improving
and presenting new beauties to the eye, yet, that the citizen, the
tiller of the soil, did not exhibit that cheerfulness and contentment
which these outward appearances would seem to indicate and to
justify. The citizen was not entirely satisfied with the adminis-
tration of his government — he complained that it was an expensive
one — that notwithstanding a heavy debt hung over the State
which was not, in any material degree, being reduced, yet that
the taxes of his labor increased and were increasing on him from
year to year — he believed and held that a frugal people, who were
chiefly agriculturists, and whose wealth was dug, by the labor of
their hands, from the earth, should have an efficient government
but a frugal and economical one. To effect reforms which should
insure such a government, was a consideration with the people
in calling this Convention. In curtailing expenses he was pleased
to say that thus far our action had come up to the views and
expectations of the people. The expenses of a State census is to
be saved by adopting the census taken by the U. S. government;
elections are designed to be held in November and thus the neces-
sity for two elections in a year avoided; the legislative session
is limited and the pay of members is reduced and thus this heavy
item in former appropriations, will henceforward be comparatively,
a light one. Let the same reform be carried into every department
— our circumstances call for rigid economy — the credit of the
State demands it.

If, then, the experience of other States has shown that the
office of Governor can be filled consistently with the public
interest — can be well filled — at an expense less than that proposed
by the resolution, the people will hold us answerable if we do not
profit by that experience.

The State of Ohio, with a population double that of this State,
allows to her Governor a salary of one thousand dollars; New
Hampshire the same amount; Vermont seven hundred and fifty

SATURDAY, JULY lo, 1847 377

dollars; Rhode Island four hundred dollars. If, in these States,
where wealth and luxuriance abound, and some of which are free
of debt, these sums are considered compensation, might they not
well be considered such in this agricultural State — this State of
simple manners and frugal habits?

He was disposed to allow the holders of the office of honor
little more than a plain citizen required for the support of himself
and family. The amendment, however, offered by him proposed
an allowance equal to that reported by the committee as a salary
for the Auditor. This ought to be sufficient. For a house is
provided by the State for the Governor — none for the Auditor —
the office of Auditor, too, is one of more labor and less honor.
The argument that the Governor must have his levees and give
his dinners might be a consideration to be entertained if the State
were differently circumstanced, but should not while she continues
in her present embarrassed condition. These things are not abso-
lutely necessary, and if agreeable to the feelings of the Governor
or any citizen let them be done at their private expense, not at the
expense of the public.

Under these reductions of salaries and other expenses, the
condition of the treasury would improve. Auditor's warrants
would no longer be discounted and shaved and hawked about in
search of buyers — ^jobs to be done for the State would not longer
be contracted for at the present ruinous rates to which the State
is forced, by reason of her paying in miserably depreciated war-
rants of the Auditor. These moderate salaries too will make it
the object and the interest of officers and legislators to give
an eye to the finances of the State and provide against any depre-
ciation of her paper in the future.

But a great gain to the State from this reduction in the salaries
of officers" and pay of members of the Legislature will be in this,
that the compensation allowed to them will form a standard of
value, and that, in all contracts made by them in behalf of the
State with agents, commissioners &c., the sums agreed to be paid
for services will be regulated by this standard — the compensation
which members and officers themselves receive. Countenance
extravagance in them, by .giving them large salaries and
this extravagance will characterize all their appropriations and all

378 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

contracts made by them for the State. Make, however, the pay
of members of the Legislature such as has, here, been voted for
them, and the salary of Governor such as proposed by the amend-
ment, and there will be an end to these extravagant expenditures-
of which our books are so full — an end to the exorbitant pay of
former years, such, for instance as has been given to agents
to select lands given to the State by the General Government, to
agents to protect canal lands &c., there will be an end to this
eternal speculation on the State.

Mr. THOMPSON opposed the reduction.

Mr. WEAD said, his vote upon the sum to be allowed the
Governor would depend entirely upon the duties which would be
assigned him in this constitution; and he would, also, like to
know whether it was intended that the Governor should reside at
the seat of government — which in his opinion was an important
consideration. The present Governor is, also, fund commissioner,
and before he could vote to fix the salary of the office, he would
like those questions to be answered. Fifteen hundred dollars a
year was not too much for the office, if the Governor was compelled
to reside here. If allowed to remain at his home, so large a
salary was not needed. In the eastern States, in Massachusetts,
New Hampshire — certainly in Vermont, the Governor was not
required to reside at the seat of government, and that accounted
for the small salaries allowed them. The Governor who is com-
pelled to reside at the seat of government was, in a great measure,
obliged to keep an open house, for members of the Legislature, to
receive strangers, and was to some extent the official organ of
the State. He wolild be obliged to neglect his own business at
home, and devote himself entirely to public business, while if at
home, he could attend to his ordinary business without any pecu-
niary loss. He could see no necessity for our providing that the
Governor should reside here, and thought that by attending here
occasionally, at the time of the meeting of the General Assembly,
that the duties of the office could be administered as well. He
would vote for the $1,500.

Mr. ARCHER was in favor of allowing a good salary to the
Governor and having him reside at the seat of government.

Mr. LOGAN was like the gentleman from Fulton, unable to

SATURDAY, JULY lo, 1847 379

vote upon this question until he knew what duties the Governor
would be required to perform. He was in favor of the fifteen
hundred a year.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall was in favor of the sum reported
by the committee — say twelve hundred and fifty dollars a year, and
thought that quite sufficient. He alluded to the State of Indiana
where he had resided a number of years, and where the salaries
of the Governor and the judges were very low.

Mr. BOND was in favor of the one thousand dollars a year.

The question being on Mr. Dale's amendment to strike out
^1,500 and insert one thousand, the question was divided; and
being taken on striking out was decided in the affirmative — yeas
86, nays not counted; and then being taken on inserting, was
decided in the negative — yeas 44, nays not counted.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess oflFered the following as a
substitute for the amendment of Mr. Knapp, to strike out the
original section and insert- — " the Governor shall reside at the seat
of government, and receive at stated times, as a salary for his
services, the sum of two thousand dollars per annum, which shall
not be increased nor diminished; and shall be ex officio fund
commissioner."

In offering the above, he explained the many duties which the
Governor would be obliged to perform. He was obliged to be at
the seat of government, as duties required the actual presence of
the Governor every day. Requisitions from other States for
persons charged with crime, were coming here, and the Governor
and he alone was obliged to act upon it; for they required his
personal action upon them. He was to decide upon their legality
and could not delegate the power to do so to any other individual.
They were cases requiring the exercise of his own judgment, and
unless he were here to attend to them, the parties would have to
hunt him up in all parts of the State, and the end of justice would
be defeated by the escape of the accused. The same would apply
to petitions for pardons, requiring an exercise of power, judgment
and discretion which could not be delegated to any other person.

He alluded to the fact that no man of any ability could be
selected to fill the office at one thousand dollars a year, and it was
not to be expected that the Governor was to live in a style beneath

38o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the dignity of the post, and in a way that he otherwise would not.
Something must be allowed for the refinements of mind: something
must be allowed to the accomplishments of thought, for they con-
stitute the only aristocracy in the land, and they ought to be
encouraged. He said, that a man chosen to be Governor of the
State, would occupy a post where such things would be looked
for, and there should be an allowance for something more than
for the level of society. True these accomplishments of the mind,
the aristocracy of intellect, were open to all, and should deserve
our encouragement, but are we to erect toll gates upon the road
to preferment through which they were to go? It should be
recollected that a man gave up all other business to attend to the
office of Governor — and had he a family, had children to educate —
how could it be done with such a pittance? He had a right to
educate his children and it should be every delegate's ambition
to place it in the power of every man to give his children an edu-
cation equal to their standing. He (Mr. C.) had lived here
at $i,ooo for four years — that is he did'nt live at all. He had
^i,ooo for two years, and then was cut down to J8oo, and he could
speak from experience that the salary was not sufficient to afford
a man a living. He had remained here four years in office, and
went home poorer than when he came; he went home and found
himself out of business, his clients all gone, other lawyers had
taken them, and he found himself like [a] young man just starting in
the world; and now was forced to commence anew, to go to work
at his profession to support himself and family. Mr. C. followed
the subject much further and concluded by remarking, that if
they allowed picayune salaries they must expect picayune officers
— if dollar salaries dollar officers.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery replied, and in the course of his
remarks, reminded the committee that at the last session of the Leg-
islature there were a number of candidates hanging round the
Legislature for a vacant judgeship, and the salaries were then but
?i,ooo; and no sooner were they elected, than they crowded the
lobbies and commenced begging the Legislature to increase their
salaries, saying they could not live on one thousand — that they
had families to support and children to educate. Nothing of this,
however, was heard when they were candidates; they were willing

SATURDAY, JULY lo, 1847 381

then to have the office at one thousand a year. He opposed any
sum over that proposed by the committee, and would vote for
that all through.

Mr. LOGAN advocated an increase to fifteen hundred dollars,
as nothing more than a fair and reasonable compensation. He
thought the effect of reducing the salary to one thousand, would be
to give the office entirely to men who were rich, and who could
afford to live even without the salary. He found it difficult even
for him to live here on one thousand a year. He said that when
the salary was at one thousand, they had Gov. Duncan, one of
the wealthiest men in the State; Gov. Reynolds another. Gov.
Edwards and Gov. Coles, both rich men, and all of whom could
afford to live as Governor of the State without reference at all to
the salary. He alluded to the difficulties attending the adminis-
tration of affairs, if the Governor resided elsewhere than at the
seat of government, and thought the proposed saving, by allowing
him to reside at home, would be of more expense to the people
having business to transact with him, and which required his atten-
dance, would be more than the proposed increase. He thought it
was poor economy; it was spoiling a knife worth twenty-five cents
to skin a flint not worth a farthing.

Mr. GREEN of Taz[e]well said, that when the section had
been proposed he thought it perfectly proper; then came the
amendments, and he had watched to see who were in favor of
amending; then he had endeavored to satisfy himself as to the
motives inducing them to propose the amendments. And although
it was not proper at all times to allude to motives of gentlemen,
he hoped he would be pardoned in stating what had been his
impressions. He had looked around at those who had proposed
the increase, and had come to the conclusion that they all had a
sly notion that at some time or another, they would be called upon
to occupy the office, the salary of which we were now about to fix.
This was more evident to his mind, from the fact, that his friend
from Sangamon and his friend from Clinton, whose chances were
very desperate and the probability very slight, proposed only the
moderate increase of two hundred and fifty dollars; but the gen-
tleman from Jo Daviess, whose chances were fair, who was on the
right side, and who had the start of his competitors, had stopped

382 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

at nothing short of two thousand dollars. Now, he was very
willing to oblige these gentlemen, but he felt he owed a duty to
the State, which was much embarrassed and in debt, and he could
not vote to increase the salary, particularly as he felt sure, from
the patriotism of the gentlemen, that when the State could not
get along without them, that they would generally give her their
services at one thousand per annum.

Mr. HOGUE moved the committee rise, &c., which motion
was carried, and the chairman reported and asked leave to sit
again. Granted.

Mr. SCATES suggested to the members the propriety of re-
maining in the hall after the adjournment, to make arrangements
about attending the funeral of Col. Hardin; and as the committees
desired to have a meeting that afternoon, he moved the Conven-
tion adjourn till Monday at 9 a. m.
Carried.

XXIX. MONDAY, JULY 12, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Palmer of Marshall.

Mr. LOCKWOOD presented certain propositions in relation
to the redemption of land sold for taxes, which he said he would
call up at some other time.

Mr. HURLBUT moved that it be laid on the table, and 200
copies be ordered to be printed. Ordered.

Mr. SCATES, from the committee on the Judiciary made a
report.

Mr. MARKLEY moved that 200 copies be printed. Ordered.

Mr. SCATES, from the same committee, reported back sundry
resolutions, and asked to be discharged from the further consider-
ation thereof. Granted.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac presented a report of the minority of
the Judiciary committee. Two hundred copies ordered to be
printed.

Mr. CAMPBELLof Jo Daviess moved a call of the Convention,
and 124 members answered to their names; and then further pro-
ceedings were dispensed with.

Leave of absence was granted to Messrs. Kreider, Sharpe,
Morris and Miller.

Mr. HURLBUT, from the Judiciary committee, reported
certain additional sections to be added to those reported by the
committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. ROUNTREE offered a substitute.

Mr. SCATES moved they be laid on the table, and 200 copies
of each be printed. Carried.

Mr. DAWSON offered a resolution that a majority of the Con-
vention shall constitute a quorum to do business, till the 20th, and
that hereafter that no member shall have leave of absence, unless
on account of sickness.

Mr. SCATES moved that the Convention resolve itself into
committee of the whole. Carried, and Mr. Crain took the Chair.

The committee resumed the consideration of the report of the
383

384 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Executive committee. The question pending was on the substi-
tute for Section 5, offered by Mr. Campbell of Jo Daviess.

Mr. LOCKWOOD made a few remarks in favor of the Gover-
nor being required to remain at the seat of Government during his
term of office.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess pointed out the vast difference
in effect between the reduction of the pay of the members of the
Legislature and that of the Governor. In the former case, they
were called here in the winter season, when farmers could lose no
crop, when lawyers could attend the supreme court at the same
time, and when, from the shortness of the session, no person's
business would be injured or neglected; while the Governor was
obliged to sell out his furniture at home; give up all his business, —
if a farmer, rent his farm — if a lawyer, lose all his clients, and be
here four years, entirely cut off from any other business. He
thought the reduction of the salary to ? 1,000 would have the effect
of excluding all poor men from the office, and secure it to the rich;
that the State would be deprived of the talents which poverty
possesses, and have rich men for Governors though they were
stupid and incompetent.

Mr. PINCKNEY thought that $2,000 was extravagant, and
would vote for $1,500 a year as the salary of the Governor.

Mr. McCALLEN thought the discussion upon the salary was
premature. He would like to know what duties were to be re-
quired of the officer, and whether he would be required to reside
here, before he could vote upon the amount of his salary. If the
office was to be a mere nominal one, one of empty title only,
$500 would be sufficient, but if required to reside here, and give
up all his other business, and devote himself to the duties of his
office, $2,000 was nothing more than a fair remuneration. He was
of opinion that the effect of allowing but a small salary would
be to deprive every poor man in the State of the privilege of hold-
ing the office, and to raise up an aristocracy of wealth which it
was our policy to oppose.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall advocated the amount proposed
by the committee — $1,250.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess modified his substitute by
leaving the amount of salary blank; and it was then adopted.

MONDAY, JULY 12, 184.7 385

Mr. WEST supported $1,500 as a proper sum.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that at the suggestion
of his friend from Madison he would move to fill the blank with
1 1, 500.

Mr. SCATES opposed the amendment as an unnecessary ex-
travagance, in the present circumstances of the State; and was of
opinion that the proper inquiry was, what sum was necessary to
enable a man to live comfortably and well, and not what was re-
quired to enable him to live extravagantly. — The State should
allow her Governor a sum sufficient to support him while in office,
and no more; he did not think he should be paid for his services.
He had made inquiries, and was informed that his friend from
Sangamon, (Mr. Edwards) who, as everyone was aware, lived
well, gave the most elegant and sumptuous entertainments, and
whose house was always open to the members of the Legislature
and strangers, had said that his expenses did not exceed $1,200 a
year. Upon this sum, said Mr. S., I think the Governor may live
comfortably and well, and I do not think that any one who may
hold the office will desire to exceed in comfort and hospitality the
gentleman from Sangamon.

Mr. THOMAS moved to fill the blank with "two thousand
dollars;" and, on a division, the motion was lost.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that he would like to ask
the gentleman from Jefferson, if he, when he was receiving fifteen
hundred dollars a year as judge of the Supreme Court, succeeded
in laying up a large sum of money? Did he complain that that
pay was too large, too extravagant? If there were any such com-
plaints made, he (Mr. C.) never heard of them; but he had, when
the salary was at one thousand, heard them declare from their
seats that it was impossible for them to live at that pay and sup-
port their families.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery replied, that the judges were
obliged to be absent from their families for nine months in the
year; that they were obliged to pay tavern bills, when board was
at one dollar to one dollar and fifty cents a day, and that their
expenses were such that one thousand dollars was not sufficient.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon said, that he was sorry his name
had been introduced, as the remark had been made by him with-

386 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

out any intention to have it bear upon the question. He would
say, however, that he could live on the sum stated, but then he
was at home, his house was furnished, and he would not be obliged
to break up his household and furnish a new one, as would be the
case of a Governor who came here from another part of the State.
As to the hospitality which the Governor would be obliged to show,
and the open house for strangers and members of the Legislature,
he did not think this should have any weight upon the question.
Past experience, and he made the remark in no spirit of unkindness
or of personal application, had clearly satisfied him that it could
be dispensed with. Not one of the State officers who had resided
here for years past, with the exception of Mr. Walters, ever had
shown any hospitality to strangers or members of the Legislature,
or had kept an open house, such as spoken of by gentlemen.
Moreover, he was informed that the present Governor rents out
the house provided for him by the State, and has the amount of
the rent deducted from his board. He thought the sum proposed
by the committee sufficient.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that the reason he gave
no parties, nor kept an open house while he was a State officer, was
that the State did not allow him enough to do so with.

Mr. EDWARDS said, he did not refer to the gentleman; his
well known spirit of hospitality and friendship satisfied all that it
was not his fault, if he was not generous.

The question was taken on the motion to insert $i,ooo, and
result yeas 55, nays 62. Some misunderstanding having existed
in relation to the vote, a recount was had, and resulted yeas 53,
nays 63, and the motion was lost.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to amend by inserting, " the office of
Governor shall be let to the lowest responsible bidder."

Mr. GEDDES moved to fill the blank with $1,250.

Mr. NORTON proposed $1,400.

Mr. KNOWLTON proposed $1,450, and the question being
taken on the $1,400, it was decided in the negative — yeas 38,
nays 71. The question was taken on $1,450, and resulted yeas
28, nays 70; no quorum. A motion was made that the committee
rise, and decided in the negative— and then the amendment was
lost. The question was taken on inserting $1,250, and resulted.

MONDAY, JULY 12, 1847 387

yeas 83, nays 22; no quorum. And then, on motion, the commit-
tee rose, and asked leave to sit again. Granted.
On motion the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. SHUMWAY moved a call of the Convention, and the
Convention was called, and 99 members answered to their names;
after some delay a quorum appeared.

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to take up the resolution which had
been laid on the table in the morning, providing that a majority
shall constitute a quorum — yeas 41, nays 40, no quorum. A
second vote was taken, yeas 56, nays 49; no quorum. The yeas
and nays were ordered, and the question was decided in the nega-
tive— yeas 41, nays 71.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved the Convention ad-
journ. Lost.

Mr. AIKEN offered the following:

Whereas, Mr. Hale, in a sermon on the nth day of July, in
the 2d Presbyterian Church, denounced the existing war with Mexico,
as being unjust; and whereas, such declarations ought not to be
tolerated, more especially in a republican government; and
whereas, it is unbecoming in a Minister of the Gospel, to use such
language in [a] Gospel sermon, or before the young and rising genera-
tion, therefore;

Resolved, That said Mr. Hale be excused from holding prayers
in this Convention for the future.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to lay it on the table.
Yeas 71, nays 23: no quorum. The yeas and nays were ordered
and resulted — yeas 82, nays 36.

Mr. LOCKWOOD offered a resolution that a majority of the
Convention shall be a quorum to do business till the 20th inst.
Yeas 45; nays not counted. Lost.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved that the Rev. Mr. Hale
be excused from praying in this Convention for the future. Mr.
C. said that so far as Mr. Hale was personally concerned^he felt
kindly toward him, but he objected to any man speaking of those
who had gone forth to fight the battles of their country as a moral
pest to society.

388 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. TURNBULL asked if Mr. C. had heard him say so. Mr.
C. repHed he had not. Mr. T. then said that second-hand evi-
dence was inadmissable anywhere.

~ Mr. HATCH said, that he was present at the delivery of the
sermon and heard the words repeated, and he was ready to sustain
what had been said by the gentleman from Jo Daviess. He was
particular in noticing the language used.

Mr. WEST said, that he was present and heard the sermon
alluded to, and he had understood it differently. Mr. Hale had
used words of that kind, but not without a qualification, and said
there were many honorable exceptions.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess. Honorable exceptions in a
body of men who had perilled their lives in a defence of their
country! Worse than the other.

Mr. WEST. He said exceptions amongst the volunteers.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Well, honorable exceptions amongst those
who had battled in the cause of their country!

Mr. SINGLETON said, that in order to obtain information of
what Mr. Hale had really said, and to enable him to defend
himself, he would move to lay the subject on the table. Carried.

Mr. KNAPP of Scott offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Convention highly appreciate the services
of the volunteers, both officers and privates, of this State, who have
perilled their lives in the cause of our common country in the war
with Mexico, that their fame is established upon an immovable
basis, far above the reach of calumny, having earned for them-
selves a character that needs no vindication, and which cannot be
impaired by detraction.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved to add to the resolu-
tion the following: "And this Convention highly deprecate all
reflections upon the character of the volunteers, coming from the
pulpit or any other source."

On this resolution and amendment a debate ensued, in which
Messrs. Deitz, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Pinckney, and Davis
of Montgomery participated.

Mr. LOGAN moved to insert after the word "character," in
the amendment, the words "for courage or patriotism." And

MONDAY, JULY 12, 1847 389

the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative;
and then the amendment of Mr. Campbell was adopted.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin offered a preamble and resolution,
as a substitute. The preamble contained a recital of the general
principles set forth in the constitution of the United States, and
the resolution disclaimed any power to control an expression of
opinion by any person.

The debate was resumed and continued by Messrs. Archer,
McCallen, Servant, Logan, Palmer, and Campbell of Jo
Daviess.

Mr. Campbell of Jo Daviess moved to lay the substitute on
the table.

Mr. Palmer of Macoupin moved to lay the whole subject on
the table. The question was divided and taken first by yeas and
nays on laying Mr. P.'s resolution on the table — yeas 60, nays 54.

Then on laying the preamble on the table — yeas 9, nays 102.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to refer the preamble to the commit-
tee on Bill of Rights.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon raised a point of order — could
the preamble be so referred?

After argument in opposition to the order of the motion by
Mr. Casey and Mr. Logan, the Chair decided the motion to be
in order.

Mr. SERVANT moved to lay the motion of reference on the
table — yeas 53, nays 44. No quorum.

Mr. GEDDES moved the Convention adjourn till Thursday
at 3 p. m. — yeas 41, nays 51. Lost.

The motion to lay the reference on the table was then put
again and carried.

The question was then put on the substitute, (the preamble)
and resulted yeas 44, nays 50. No quorum voting.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved the Convention adjourn
till Thursday at 3 p. m.

Mr. BOND moved the Convention adjourn sine die — ayes
aad noes demanded, and then the motion was withdrawn.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved the Convention adjourn for two
weeks.

390 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved the Convention
adjourn till the 15th of November.

Mr. BOND renewed his motion to adjourn sine die; the ayes
and noes were demanded and ordered.

Mr. Z. CASEY appealed to the gentlemen to withdraw their
motions, and to the Convention to proceed with the business for
which they had been sent. He deprecated the great waste of
time, and earnestly hoped that we would proceed to business.

Messrs. WHITESIDE, BOND, CAMPBELL of McDonough,
severally, withdrew their motions, and the Convention, in order
to attend the funeral of Col. Hardin, at Jacksonville, on Wednesday,
adjourned till T[h]ursday at 3 p. m.

XXX. THURSDAY, JULY 15, 1847

The Convention, pursuant to adjournment, met at 3 p. m.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, there was apparently no
quorum present, and probably there was not in town. He, there-
fore, moved' the Convention adjourn till to-morrow at eight o'clock;
and the question being taken on the motion, was decided in the
negative.

Mr. PETERS moved a call of the house; and it was ordered.

The Convention was called, and after the absentees had been
called again, a quorum appeared.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved that all further proceedings under the
call be dispensed with. Carried.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the Convention resolve itself into com-
mittee of the whole, and the Convention did resolve itself into
committee of the whole — Mr. Crain in the chair, and resumed the
consideration of the report of the committee on the Executive
Department.

The question pending, was on filling the blank, in the substi-
tute proposed by Mr. Campbell of Jo Daviess for the fifth section,
with the sum of ^1,250, (annual salary of the Governor;) and the
vote being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative.

The section was then passed over informally for the present.
Sections 6 and 7 were passed without amendment.

Sec. 8. The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves,
commutations, and pardons, after conviction, for all offences
except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions
and with such restrictions and limitations as he may think proper,
subject to such regulations as may be provided by law relative to
the manner of applying for pardons. Upon conviction for treason,
he shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence until
the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at its next
meeting; when the General Assembly shall either pardon the
convict or commute the sentence, direct the execution of the sen-
tence, or grant a further reprieve. He shall, biennially, communi-
391

392 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

cate to the General Assembly each case of reprieve, commutation,
or pardon granted; stating the name of the convict, the crime for
which he was convicted, the sentence and its date, and the date
of commutation, pardon, or reprieve.

Mr. PETERS offered to amend. After "applying for par-
dons," at the end of first sentence, insert, "and he shall also have
power to grant pardons after indictments found, and before trial,
and conviction, whenever the judge or judges of the court, wherein
the indictment shall be pending, shall recommend to him to grant
such pardon;" which amendment was adopted.

Mr. KNAPP of Scott moved to insert after the word "date"
where it first occurs, the words, "and his reasons for granting such
pardons."

Mr. HARDING offered as a substitute for the amendment:
"and at the time of such pardon he shall publish at large his reasons
for granting the same;" which substitute was rejected.

And the question being taken on the amendment, it resulted,
yeas 37, nays 59 — no quorum voting. And a second vote being
taken, it stood, yeas 35, nays 70 — no quorum voting. And the
committee rose and reported that fact to the Convention.

Mr. THOMAS moved a call of the Convention. Ordered,
and a quorum responded to their names. The Convention then
resolved itself into committee of the whole again, and the vote
being taken on the amendment, it was decided in the negative.

Mr. HARDING renewed his substitute as an amendment,
and the same was again rejected.

Mr. TURNBULL moved to strike out the words "biennially to
the General Assembly" and insert "publish in the several papers
published at the seat of government." Messrs. Archer and
Davis of Montgomery opposed the amendment and Mr. Consta-
ble advocated its adoption.

The question being taken, the amendment was rejected.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to amend by inserting after "treason"
the word "murder."

He said, that when the report of the Judiciary committee came
before the Convention, he intended, if none else did, to move the
abolition of capital punishment, and the object of this amendment
was to meet that proposition. He desired that when a man was

THURSDAY, JULY 15, 1847 393

convicted of murder, that he should not be hung, and at the same
time he wished to place him beyond the reach of the pardoning
power, by the Governor.

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau opposed the amendment briefly.

The question being taken on the amendment it was decided in
the negative.

Sec. 9 was passed without amendment.

Sec. 10. He may, on extraordinary occasions, convene the
General Assembly by proclamation, and shall state to them, when
assembled, the purpose for which they shall have been convened;
and the General Assembly shall be limited in their action to such
matters only as the Governor shall lay before them.

Mr. PETERS moved to add at the end of the section: "Ex-
cept at such special session trials of cases of impeachment may
be had, and removals from office made in the manner provided in
the consdtution."

And the question being taken thereon, the same was rejected.

Mr. SCATES moved to insert after "occasions" the following:
"which would cause great and irremediable injury by delay;" and,
on a division the amendment was lost.

Mr. THORNTON moved to strike out all after the words,
"the general assembly shall," and insert "enter upon no legislative
business except that for which they were specially called."

Mr. CHURCHILL offered the following as an amendment to
the amendment: strike out all after the word "proclamation," and
insert, "the general assembly, when so convened, shall have the
same power, and be liable to the same restrictions as in a regular
session."

And the question being taken thereon, the same was rejected.
The question recurring upon the amendment of Mr. Thornton, it
resulted, yeas 43, nays 60; no quorum voting. A second vote
was taken, and the amendment lost — yeas 42, nays 68.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to strike out all after "proclama-
tion."

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to strike out all after
"convened;" which was accepted by Mr. McC. as a modification
of his amendment.

394 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the committee rise, report progress,
and ask leave to sit again; which was carried.

The committee then rose, reported progress, and asked leave to
sit again; which was granted.

A motion was made that the Convention adjourn till to-morrow
at 9 A. M., but the motion was negatived; and then, on motion, the
Convention adjourned unt 1 8 a. m. to-morrow.

XXXI. FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Green of Tazewell.

Messrs. MOFFETT, JACKSON, KNOWLTON, BROCK-
MAN, and FARWELL, presented petitions from their respective
counties, praying the appointment of a superintendent of common
schools, all of which were referred to the comm ttee on Education.

Mr. WOODSON offered the following as two additional rules;
which were adopted^yeas 71, nays 50:

Rule. No resolution or proposition which has been or which
shall be hereafter introduced in the Convention shall be considered
unless it relates to or is directly connected with the "alteration,
revision or amendment of the constitution," without the consent
of at least two-thirds of the members of the Convention previously
obtained, and if such consent be so given, the same whall be voted
on without debate.

Rule. Hereafter, immediately after the reception of petitions
and reports from the standing committees, the Convention shall
resolve itself into a committee of the whole on the reports of
standing committees, which shall be the standing order of the day
until the same are concluded.

Leave of absence was granted to Messrs. JAMES, KITCHELL,
PALMER of Macoupin.

Mr. WEAD, from the special committee on townships, and
the organization thereof, made a report containing a proposed
article to be incorporated in the constitution; which was read, laid
on the table, and 200 copies ordered to be printed.

The Convention then, on motion, resolved itself into committee
of the whole, and resumed the consideration of the report made by
the committee on [E]xecutive Department — Mr. Crain in the
chair.

The question pending was on the amendment proposed by
Mr. McCALLEN.

Messrs. MINSHALL and EDWARDS of Madison made a few
395

396 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

remarks in opposition to the amendment and in favor of the sec-
tion as reported by the committee.

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau said, that he would be in favor of the
report of the committee if he thought that it would hereafter be
construed in the manner intended by the committee, but he con-
sidered that another interpretation than that intended would be
placed upon it, and he would, therefore, move to strike out the
last clause, and have the same idea inserted in language that can-
not be misconstrued.

Mr. LOGAN said, he desired to say a few words in explanation
of the position he occupied on this question. He thought he saw,
when looking at this question through the dark vista of futurity,
scenes of tyranny, oppression and misrule; a violation of the great
principles of republican government, and the constitutional estab-
lishment of a legislative department, abandoned to the power and
control of one man, styled Governor. This would be the effect
of the last clause in the section now before us, if retained in the
constitution.

He opposed the section in its present shape, because it conferred
upon the Governor legislative power, which was not contemplated
by any of the States, or the people of this State, when they pro-
posed to establish a republican form of government. Our govern-
ment was one of three co-ordinate branches, and it was never
designed that either one of those departments was to invade upon
the duties of the others, or in any way assume the peculiar func-
tions not belonging to itself. The clause in the section now before
us placed in the hands of one man the great and dangerous power
to direct and control the Legislature in its actions — to say to it
"thus far shalt thou go and no farther;" to say to it what acts he
required them do, and to deny them the right of legislating upon
those subjects which he had no desire should be touched. This
section gave him this dangerous power over the action of the
Legislature at a called session, and if the principle was good at a
special session, why would it not hold good at the regular sessions?
If it was safe and proper to give him the power at one session, why
not let him have it at all sessions? If the great evil to be dreaded
at special sessions was excessive legislation, and this section was
intended as a remedy for that, why not apply it to general sessions;

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 397

for the remedy if good in one case was good in the other. He
thought that under the spirit of our system of government, the
legislative power properly belonged to the Legislature as the im-
mediate representatives of the people, and that it contained the
views and sentiments of the people, and a better knowledge of
what laws the people desired than under any circumstances could
be possessed by a Governor. And he objected against the bestow-
al of such an immense power upon the Governor. The constitu-
tion never contemplated conferring any legislative power upon
the Governor; it gave him the power to call the Legislature
together when extraordinary circumstances required it, because
that body had no power to call themselves together. He also
opposed the vesting in the Governor the power to call a session of
the Legislature, and propose to them, as long as they continued
in session, new schemes and projects. He desired to see the object
set forth in the proclamation calling them together, and none
other allowed, as it would be found to be the case that the Governor
would find himself beset by friends, political friends, who would
beg him to recommend to the Legislature favorite measures
desired by them, and they, in their turn, would support the schemes
of the Governor, and thus, by a system of combination and log-
rolling, the Governor would be enabled to wield an extensive
legislative power. He would thus become a central power, and
could control the others. He thought the Legislature the proper
body to judge of what was its proper duties, and what legislation
was required for the people.

Mr. KNOX moved, as an amendment, to add to the section
"at the commencement of the session."

Mr. BROCKMAN followed in favor of the section as it stood.
He thought the general sessions of the Legislature, to be held
biennially, would be sufficient for the legislation required by the
people, and for the stability in them so much desired; and that the
extraordinary session should be devoted solely to the business
which the Governor should lay before it. He had full confidence
in the Legislatures that might come after us, and dreaded no
such evil results as had been predicted by the gentleman from
Sangamon.

Mr. HAWLEY opposed the section as unprecedented, and as

398 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

one calculated to defeat the object of the formation of an independ-
ent legislative department.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison replied briefly to Mr. LOGAN,
and controverted the probability of the evils declared by the gentle-
man to be consequent upon the adoption of this section.

Mr. DEMENT was in favor of the old constitution as it stood
in reference to this subject, and opposed to the section as reported
by the committee. He did not believe that the effect of this
restriction would be to restrict legislation at the extraordinary
session, but would rather increase it. Every member who had
any particular subject which he desired legislation upon, would call
upon the governor and request him to call the attention of the
legislature to it; and if he had not the influence with the Governor,
he would by the intervention of friends, obtain that privilege.
The Governor would feel obliged, from feelings of courtesy, to do
so, and thus every sort of matter would be before the legislature;
and that too with the sanction of the governor's recommendation
that they were matters of importance. And, in this way, the
Governor himself would be placed in a very delicate position,
either to recommend trifling matters or to lay himself open to the
charge of denying one man's request when he may have acceded
to that of another. He thought there was no danger in entrusting
the legislature with all matters, and allowing them to be the proper
judges of what was required by the people. He again said he
would prefer the provision as it stood in the old constitution, to
the section as reported by the committee.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac said, that he supposed the object of the
committee, in reporting the section, or the last clause of it, was to
prevent any legislation upon matters other than those for which
it had been called. He was in favor of the object which they had
had in view, but he did not believe that it would be effected by the
section as it now stood. The clause, which it was proposed
to strike out, placed in the hands of the Governor the power to
recommend and lay before the legislature at this extraordinary
session, any subject which he might think proper, whether that
subject had any reference to the specific object of the called session
or not. Mr. D. was not willing to give the governor this power,
by which he would be enabled to regulate the action of the legis-

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 399

lature by submitting to them whatsoever he thought proper, and
having legislation upon subjects which he only, perhaps, had a
desire or an interest in having legislative action upon. He was
opposed to it because he considered that when the legislature was
called together, which should be only when extraordinary business
required their immediate action, they should be confined in their
actions to the object for which they were called, and should enter
into no business but that stated in the proclamation. He would
vote against the amendment offered by the gentleman from Knox,
in order that the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Shelby (Mr. THORNroN) on yesterday, and which had been voted
down, might be reconsidered, and adopted. That amendment
defined, in proper terms, the action of the legislature at the extra-
ordinary session, and prohibited any general legislation. It was
similar to a provision in the constitution of the State of Tennessee,
and he was sure it had not been understood, or else it would have
been adopted.

Mr. WEAD was in favor of the section as it had been reported,
and opposed to any amendment. He thought that it was under-
stood that the people of the State felt there had been too much
legislation in Illinois, and they had been informed upon that
subject to-day, by men of experience and of age. That there
had been too much legislation none could deny; and to remedy
that evil and guard against it for the future, was one of the princi-
pal reforms expected from this Convention. Laws had been
passed at one session and changed at the next; and all this was to
be prevented for the future.

If, however, general legislation was desired more frequently
than once in two years, why not have the Legislature meet every
year, and do away with the provision for biennial sessions? He
considered this matter settled and thought the only question now
for them to dispose of was, what restrictions should be placed upon
the action of the extraordinary sessions, which might be called by
the Governor. It was, should we confine them to legislation upon
the subjects contained in the proclamation by the Governor or
to what is laid before them, in his message to them, when they
shall have assembled or shall we allow them to act upon what he
may lay before them from time to time, during the session or

40O ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

shall they have power to go on and legislate upon all matters
which they may think proper for them to legislate upon, independ-
ent of the object for which they may have been called? These,
in his opinion, were the proper subjects of inquiry. The last had
been settled by the former action of the Convention, in fixing the
sessions to be held biennially, thus prohibiting general legislation
more than once in two years. To the first there were many
objections; one of these was, that no man could forsee the great
number of events that might transpire between the time of issuing
the proclamation and the time ,of the meeting of the Legislature;
and the Governor may set forth in that proclamation a vast num-
ber of subjects, which will embrace every sort of matter proper for
legislative action, some of which may not be popular with the
people in one section, and some unpopular in another section.
The Convention has already said that the legislature shall meet
but once in two years for general legislation, with unlimited powers,
except so far as restrained by the general provisions of the con-
stitution, and can we not provide the restrictions to be placed
upon their action when assembled for a specific object, so as to
confine them to legislation upon that object, without prejudicing
their action, or treating them with distrust? Much good will be
found to result from this resolution. Take away from the Gover-
nor this privilege of laying before them the only subjects upon
which they can act, and you throw open the doors again to all the
evils of special, and local, and excessive legislation, as we would
have if the sessions were annual.

He was in favor of allowing the Governor this check upon the
action of the Legislature at this extraordinary session, and he
feared none of those evils, of combination and log-rolling, which
had been spoken of by the gentlemen. The Governor, it
was to be presumed, was to be a man of some character and
honesty, and that very character, his pride, his self-respect, and
his regard for his position as representative of the State and the
whole people, and not any local interest or section, would keep
him above such contrivances and designing schemes, and govern
all his actions with a desire to promote the general welfare of the
State. He will take care that all things proper and desirable for

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 401

the action of the Legislature shall be brought before the people
and all others excluded.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery made a few remarks in opposition
to the section.

The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. Knox,
and it was rejected.

The question recurring on the amendment of Mr. McCallen
to strike out, it was decided in the negative— yeas 60, nays 64.

Mr. WOODSON moved to strike out the words, "lay before
them," and insert: "set forth in his proclamation."

Mr. CONSTABLE moved, as an amendment to the amend-
ment, to add to the same: "and such other subjects as may be
introduced by the concurrence of two-thirds of the members of
each house composing said general assembly, based upon the
important exigency demanding this action and connected with the
public welfare."

Mr. PRATT opposed the amendment of Mr. W. as without a
precedent in any state constitution in the Union, where the
instance or precedent of a case where the Governor was required
to state, in his proclamation calling an extraordinary session,
the object for which he convened them. He would refer the
gentleman to the extraordinary session of the Congress in 1837,
called by the President. In the proclamation the object was not
expressed, although every one knew the cause — the financial
difficulties of the land; — but at the meeting of Congress, the
President sent to them his message upon the subject of the finances
of the country, and submitted to them the Independent Treasury.
Congress, however, at the extraordinary session, rejected the
Independent Treasury, and adopted a loan by treasury notes, for
the Independent Treasury bill was not passed for two years after-
wards. No such thing was required in any state in the Union, and
there were good reason [s] for not doing so. One great reason
was, the great expense of so doing. If the arguments were set
forth in detail in the proclamation, it would make it very long,
and to have it published in all the papers over the state, would cost
a great amount, which he thought it better to avoid.

Mr. WOODSON said, that if he understood the objection
urged by the gentleman, it was that the proposition contained in

402 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the amendment was one which had not been required by other
states; this was one reason in his (Mr. W.'s) opinion, why it should
be adopted, and the legislature confined to the specific object for
which they had been called upon to legislate. By having the
object stated in the proclamat[i]on it would be known to the
people in the state, and the representatives might be enabled to
obtain an expression of the people's sentiments upon the subject.
We had already made provision, in the article of the constitution
reported by the committee on the Legislative Department, that
the legislature should meet, for purposes of general legislation,
but once in two years — a measure that had been universally
demanded by the people; and if they were to be called together
on these extraordinary occasions, the people should know the
object of the call, and the representatives ought to have time,
before the meeting of the session, to exchange their views and
sentiments with their constituents upon matters which they were
to act upon; and when they did meet to carry out the wishes of
their constituents upon that subject, act upon it, and that only,
and then go home.

Mr. LOGAN said, he would say one word to the gentleman
from Jo Daviess (Mr. Pratt) upon the question of expense. If
the objects which the Governor desired to lay before the legislature
at these extraordinary sessions were presented in detail to the
people, at the time of the proclamation calling the general assem-
bly together, it would not cost any more than if he did so, as he
would, in his message to them at the opening of the session. —
They would have to be presented at one time or the other, and the
expense would be no less at one time than at the other.

Mr. PRATT replied, that the gentleman from Sangamon was
mistaken. To have the long proclamation advertised in the
various papers of the state, for a month or more previous to the
meeting of the legislature, would cost considerably more than
having the message set up at one office, and then 20,000 extra
copies, which would cost but the price of the paper and the press-
work in addition, circulated over the state. If that gentleman
would examine, he would find out that there would be considerable
difference in the cost.

The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. Con-

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 403

STABLE, and the same was rejected. And thereupon the motion
of Mr. W. to strike out and insert, and the same was rejected —
yeas 59, nays 63.

Mr. HAYES moved the committee rise, &c.; and the com-
mittee rose, reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.
Granted.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention met, and immediately resolved itself into
committee of the whole — Mr. Crain in the chair.

Mr. PETERS moved to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment proposed by Mr. Thornton had been rejected.

And the vote being taken on reconsidering the same, it was
decided in the affirmative — yeas 6^, nays 57. And then the said
amendment was adopted — yeas 75, nays 23-

Mr. KENNER moved to strike out the words, "when assem-
bled the purposes for which they were convened," and the same
was adopted — yeas 76, nays 40.

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to strike out the whole section;
which motion was negatived — yeas 41, nays 72.

Sec. II. He shall be commander-in-chief of the army and
navy of this state, and of the militia, except when they shall be
called into the service of the United States.

Mr. KENNER moved to strike it out.

Mr. WHITESIDE offered, as a substitute: "He shall be
commander-in-chief of the militia of the state, except when they
shall be mustered into the service of the United States."

And the question being taken, both motions were decided in
the negative.

Sec. 12. No amendment.

Sec. 13. Providing for a Lieutenant Governor of the
State.

Mr. OLIVER moved the section be stricken out. Rejected.

Sec. 14. The Lieutenant Governor shall, by virtue of his
office, be Speaker of the Senate; have a right, when in committee
of the whole, to debate and vote on all subjects, and, whenever
the Senate are equally divided, to give the casting vote.

404 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. CHURCHILL moved to strike out: "have a right, when
in committee of the whole, to debate and vote on all subjects."
Rejected.

Mr. SERVANT moved to strike out the words, "and vote on."
Lost.

Sections 15 and 16 were passed without amendment.

Sec. 17. If the Lieutenant Governor shall be called upon to
administer the government, and shall, while in such administra-
tion, resign, die, or be absent from the state, during the recess of
the General Assembly, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of
State for the time being to convene the Senate for the purpose of
choosing a speaker.

Mr. CHURCHILL moved to strike out all after, "assembly,"
and insert: "the speaker of the house of representatives shall act
as Governor." Lost.

Sections 18 and 19 were passed without amendment.

Sec. 20. Every bill which shall have passed the Se[n]ate
and House of Representatives shall, before it becomes a law
be presented to the Governor: if he approve, he shall sign it; but
if not, he shall return it, with his objections, to the house in which
it shall have originated; who shall enter the objections at large on
their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such recon-
sideration, two-thirds of the members present shall agree to pass
the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other
House; by which it shall likewise be reconsidered; and if approved
by two-thirds of the members present, it shall become a law not-
withstanding the objections of the Governor. But in all such
cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and
nays; and the names of the members voting for or against the bill
shall be entered on the journal of each House, respectively. If any
bill shall not be returned by the Governor within ten days, (Sun-
days excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same
shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the
Legislature shall, by their adjournment, prevent its return; in
which case the said bill shall be returned on the first day of the
meeting of the General Assembly after the expiration of said ten
days, or be a law.

Mr. WOODSON moved to strike out, " if he oppose [sic] heshall

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 405

sign it, but if not," and insert: "who shall sign the same and return
it forthwith to the house in which it originated, unless he have
constitutional objections to such bill, when."

And the question thereon being divided, was first taken on
striking out, and decided in the negative.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to strike out, " two-thirds
of the members present," and insert: "majority of all the members
elect." Rejected — yeas 60, nays 61.

Mr. [SMITH of Macon]^^ moved to strike out the whole sec-
tion. Lost.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to strike out, " two-thirds of the
members present," and insert: " two-thirds of the members elect."
He said that he oflFered this amendment for the purpose of giving
the veto power, if it was to be retained, some little force. We had
adopted, in the article on the Legislative Department, a provision
that no bill should be passed until it received a majority of the
votes of the members elect; and if the section stood as it now did,
a bill, after having been vetoed by the Governor, might be passed
by a less vote than in the first instance, for two-thirds of the mem-
bers present might, in many instances, be less than a majority
of the whole house. He thought it would be inconsistent to leave
this section in its present shape, after the action of the committee
on the former article.

Mr. PETERS enforced the same view.

Mr. LOCKWOOD thought differently; a bill which had
been passed by the legislature, and which was returned by the
Governor, came again before that body, not as a bill which had
been passed, but as a new proposition for their action, and which
would require, at least, the same vote as other bills required.

Mr. DAVIS replied, and repeated his remarks, and Mr.
LocKwooD withdrew the opinion he had just expressed, and con-
curred in the view taken by Mr. D.

Mr. LOGAN said, that the section as it now stood, reduced
the effect of the Governor's veto to a little less than nothing at all.
The house consisted of seventy-five members, and it would require
a vote of thirty-eight in its favor to pass the bill in the first instance;
the legislature may say that one-third shall constitute a quorum

'' Name supplied from the Journal of the Convention.

4o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

for the transaction of business, which would be thirty-four mem-
bers, and under this section, two-thirds of this quorum may pass
the bill. This destroyed entirely the veto power.

Mr. SINGLETON thought a majority of the members elect,
which was required to pass the bill, a sufficient check upon the
action of the Legislature, and a sufficient one for the importance
to be attached to the objections interposed by any Governor
which we may have in Illinois. He would vote for making the
majority of the members elect, a sufficient number to pass a bill
after a veto, and would oppose the two-thirds.

Mr. MINSHALL advocated the amendment — two-thirds of
the members elect, as a most invaluable safeguard against the
evils of hasty and unprovident legislation, which had been the
subject of such universal complaint for years past in our state, and
upon this floor where it had been denounced in such unmeasured
terms; and he was astonished now to hear these same gentlemen
hesitate to adopt this most salutary and wise provision against its
recurrence. He had seen the time when, if such a clause as this
had been in our constitution, it might have saved the state from
the shame, ruin and disaster which had fallen upon them, by the
wild and speculating notions of the legislature. He considered
the veto power, particularly in the western states, where such a
desire existed to rush into hasty legislation, and wild speculation,
was the wisest and most saving clause to be inserted in any consti-
tution to check the excess of over legislation. He was in favor of its
adoption in this constitution, and he thought there was a great
feeling existing among the people, which looked to this Conven-
tion for its adoption. Though its expediency in the hands of the
President of the United States might be doubted by some, he
could see no objection to it in a state government, but thought it
most salutary and proper.

Mr. PETERS was in favor of the amendment as proposed by
the member from McLean, and when the time would come when
the ayes and noes could be called for, he would not hesitate an in-
stant in recording his aye in favor of it. He thought its operation
had been most beneficial, and had been informed that if it had
been in our old constitution would have saved us from much ruin.
He was not acquainted with the circumstances himself, (not then

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 407

being in the state) but he was informed that when the great cause
of our misfortune — the internal improvement act, which had
created our debt, and piled up millions upon millions, which we
were to pay — the Governor had vetoed it, and when it went back to
the legislature, it was passed again by a majority of those present.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon said, he had never understood
that that bill had been vetoed.

Mr. THOMAS said, he was familiar with its history, when it
was first passed; it came before the council of revision, the Gover-
nor vetoed it, and gave his reasons. Judge Smith did the same, and
gave his reasons, and other members of the council did the same;
all the members who opposed it, gave their reasons for vetoing it,
separately, and differently.

Mr. PETERS said, that he was glad to have been informed
upon the subject, for he knew nothing of it himself, and had
referred to it as a matter of history. Any way, however, had the
Governor not been clogged by the other members of the council of
revision, and this two-third provision been in the constitution, the
state might have been saved from all the devastating evils of that
act. He again referred to the inconsistency of the section as it
now stood, which allowed a bill to be passed after a veto, by a less
number than it did in the first place, and advocated the adoption
of the amendment.

The question was then taken on striking out "present" and
inserting "elected;" and decided in the affirmative.

Mr. LOGAN moved to strike out "two-thirds" and insert
"majority."

Mr. SERVANT said, he would vote to strike out two-thirds,
if he thought he could have three-fifths inserted, but he feared
that he might not succeed, and would therefore vote against
striking out. He alluded at some length, to the internal im-
provement act, and argued that all its evils might have been
prevented if a similar provision had been in the old constitution.

Mr. KNOWLTON followed in opposition to the veto power,
in any shape, which he denounced as opposed to the principles
of republicanism — it giving to one man, the power to defeat the
action of a majority of the immediate representatives of the
people.

4o8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. SMITH of Macon said, he represented two counties,
and this question was the principal one which had been discussed
before the people by himself, and his opponents; and he was sure
that he knew the sentiments of his constituents to be entirely
opposed to the veto power in any shape. He argued at much
length against it as a relic of the British constitution, and as
entirely opposed to the true basis of republican government —
the power and sentiments of the people, as manifested by their
representatives.

Mr. McCALLEN was entirely opposed to the veto power
being engrafted on our constitution. It was anti-republican, for
it aiForded means whereby the wishes and sentiments of the people
might be defeated by one man; and as anti-democratic^for it
gave one man, styled Governor, an equal weight with forty-nine
of the representatives of the people. He alluded to the remarks
that had been made upon the internal improvement act, which it
was said might have been defeated by such a power; and argued
that even admitting the truth of that remark, it was no cause why
they should depart from the true principles of republicanism and
democracy. He thought that the whole evil of that scheme,
was the result of one exercise of the veto power by a President of
the United States. The bank of the U. States had been de-
stroyed by the veto of General Jackson, and the then good
currency of the land was taken away; the people had resolved, in
self defence, to have state banks, which had produced an inflation
of the currency, and a desire to speculate; out of that desire had
grown the internal improvement speculation — and then had come
the ruin. All of this he attributed to the veto of the charter of
the United States Bank. He denounced the veto power as one
giving the executive an authority to encroach on the legislative
department, which he said had been done gradually by every
President since the first exercise of it; and at length, it had gone
so far that the President had involved, by his own act, the country
in a war, without consulting the legislative department at all.
Many evils might have been averted to this state, had this power
been exercised. Rome had been saved three times by clothing
its executive with dictatorial powers, but that was no argument
that the true principles of our government should be abandoned.

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 409

The question was divided, and first taken on striking out
" two-thirds," and decided in the affirmative — yeas 68, nays 47.

Mr. MINSHALL moved to insert "three-fifths" instead of
"majority," as proposed.

[Mr. MINSHALL addressed the committee:"

As the question at present stands, said Mr. M., (the committee
having in their report required a vote of two-thirds of the legisla-
ture to pass a bill over the veto of the governor,) there appears to
be a diversity of opinion in the convention as to whether they
will confer the veto power on the governor or not, in the manner
in which it is thus proposed in the report of the committee. Unless
the amendment which has been proposed, to strike out the words
"members present," and insert members elected, be adopted, the
veto power as conferred by the report will amount to nothing, for
less than a majority of the whole number of members elect may
pass a bill, or a bare majority, which is already provided for in
the 1 6th section of the report of the legislative committee, requir-
ing all bills before they can become a law, to be passed by yeas
and nays, be a majority of all the members elected. I cannot,
continued Mr. M., see the necessity or use of the veto, as proposed
by the committee, unless the amendment proposed by the gentle-
man from McLean, requiring that the two-thirds should be two-
thirds of all the members elect, should be adopted. I am not
quite sure that two-thirds is the right number. I do not know
but that I would prefer a smaller number; but I must be permitted
to say, that in a State government, I regard the veto as an invalu-
able safeguard against the evils of hasty and improvident legis-
lation, which has been the subject of universal complaint for years
past, in this State; and we hear the same complaints reiterated on
this floor. Have we not been striving in every possible way to
prevent its recurrence hereafter, by narrowing down the legislative
power, and heaping restrictions upon it in every shape and form?
We have heard the legislation of the State denounced in un-
measured terms; and I must say, that I am not a little astonished
to hear gentlemen who have been so eager to check hasty legisla-

^'This speech by Minshall, together with those by Singleton, Smith
Bond, and Woodson, are taken from the Sangamo Journal, July 29.

4IO ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

tion, now, when we have arrived at the proper point— when we
have in the progress of framing a constitution — arrived at the
place were we may in the most appropriate manner interpose the
proper check to improvident legislation, I am astonished, I say,
to see the same gentlemen hesitate to adopt this salutary and wise
provision against its recurrence. I have seen the time, sir, when
such a clause as this, in the constitution of this State, might have
saved the State from the shame, ruin and disaster which have
fallen upon it. In the general government the Veto power, in
my opinion, ought to be curtailed; but in our State government
it may be safely increased.

[Some further discussion having taken place on the motion
to strike out "two-thirds" and insert three-fifths of the members
elected.]

Mr. MINSHALL said he desired to place himself in a correct
position, inasmuch as the language of the gentleman from Greene,
(Mr. Woodson,) might subject his views to misconstruction. I
am in favor, continued Mr. M., of this slight increase of the veto
power in the State government, without regard to party consider-
ation. I do not think that party has anything to do with the
matter, although some gentlemen seem to argue as if there was
in reality some connection between this matter and party con-
siderations. I regard it as a matter pertaining to the State gov-
ernment alone; as a principle proper to be incorporated in the
State constitution; as a necessary, salutary provision for the pro-
tection of the people against improvident and hasty legislation.
I have referred to the executive of the United States and to the
veto power in the United States Government, — not as a matter of
party difference — although some gentlemen have treated it in
that way; I have referred to it for the mere purpose of argument
and illustration, and I presume it may be referred to for that pur-
pose without differing with gentlemen as to the effects of the power
on the legislative interest of the government of the United States,
and without impropriety.

Mr. MINSHALL proceeded to enlarge upon this point. He
insisted that there was no analogy between the exercise of the
power under the United States government, and its exercise in a
State government; and no just comparison could be made between

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 411

its exercise by the President and its exercise by the Governor of
a State. It was not a fair argument to resort to on this occasion,
where the simple deductions of reason alone were proper; because
it furnished gentlemen with the opportunity of making improper
appeals to the prejudices of our nature, without taking the dis-
tinction, which in reality existed, between the reason for the
power in one case, and against it in the other. They were not
parallel cases. The powers of Congress were different entirely
from those of the legislature of the State. The powers of Congress
were limited and restricted to certain specified matters. In the
States, on the contrary, all power resided in the legislature except
what had been delegated to Congress. The powers of Congress
were of a limited delegated character, while those of the State
legislature were sovereign and supreme. The patronage of the
executive of the United States was large and increasing, and
possessed a controlling influence which was Hkely to operate im-
properly, if it had not done so already on the legislative depart-
ment of the government. The argument of the gentleman from
Greene, and the quotation which he has made from Justice Story,
proved that the veto power ought to be increased in the State
government, and diminished in the government of the United
States. It would be proper to restrict the power in the govern-
ment of the United States, but the same reasons for its restriction,
did not exist in a State government.

Look, said Mr. Minshall, at the history of our State govern-
ment, and let gentlemen tell me when and where the executive
department of this State, ever encroached upon, or overrun the
legislative department; when the power of patronage or influence
of the governor ever overran the legislature? When was.it?
Never. On the contrary, the history of the past in our legislative
progress shows that the legislative department has constantly
encroached upon the province of the executive; and that is almost
always the case with State legislatures, they being the active
branch and concentrating the sovereignty of the people.

Unless the executive and the other co-ordinate departments
are strongly guarded, the inclination of the legislative department
is, and ever will be, to encroach upon the others. Has not that
been the case with our State government for the last fifteen or

412 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

twenty years? Did not the legislature take from the governor
the appointment of prosecuting attorneys, and various other priv-
ileges which had been originally conferred upon him? Why, there
has been nothing else since the beginning of this government, and
particularly for the last lo or 15 years, but encroachment after
encroachment by the legislative department upon the executive,
and judicial department of the government, until it has pros-
trated the one, and rendered the other contemptible. The veto
power, then, is necessary to enable the executive by the exercise of
this negative power, to protect itself and its co-ordinate depart-
ment from the encroachments of the legislature. It must be
perfectly apparent to all who are unblinded by passion and pre-
judice, that the power should exist in a State government, for the
purpose of perserving the equilibrium and independence of the
co-ordinate branches of the government. Are we to have a gov-
ernment of co-ordinate and independent departments? Have we
not commenced with that as the basis of the constitutional govern-
ment we are now framing? If so, this provision is necessary to
the executive for its own protection. It would appear from the
position of the gentleman from Greene, that he was for dispensing
with the executive department altogether, from the holy horror
which he manifested at what he is pleased to call this monarchical
feature of the government. — Yet the government of the United
States, and of all the States in this republic, all possess this same
monarchical feature.

But this power is necessary for another important purpose,
and that is, to carry out the position of the gentlemen who now
oppose the power, but who have been strenuous advocates for
inserting in the constitution, the clause restricting legislation at a
special session, to the matters contained and specified in the proc-
lamation of the governor as the reason for calling the special
session, the inclmation of the legislature will be to break over this
restraint. Suppose the case of a special call of the legislature
under our new constitution, for a specified object, and that during
the session the legislature should, notwithstanding the restriction,
pass an act the subject of which was not comprised in the speci-
fication of reasons for calling the legislature. How is the legis-
lature to be restrained, if the governor has not the power to inter-

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 413

pose his negative to a bill of this kind, or if a bare majority be
sufficient to pass the law notwithstanding the veto? This new
feature in the legislative department alone, if gentlemen who are
in favor of it, seriously design to make it available, requires a
slight increase of the veto power. The gentleman from Greene
says, that the internal improvement system is the only instance
of excessive legislation which can be cited, and that would have
passed in spite of the veto, if it had existed. But that is not the
only case. Has the gentleman forgotten the scenes of 1840?
Did we not[stand]shoulder to shoulder in resisting the encroachments
of the legislature upon the judicial department? Was not that
enormous breach of the constitution, and the prostration of the
judiciary, returned by the council of revision; and does not the
the gentleman from Greene, well remember the manner in which it
was passed, notwithstanding the council of revision, by a majority
of just one vote? The increase of the veto power now advocated,
to three-fifths instead of a bare majority, would have saved the
State from that calamity, and the judiciary from that desecration.
The gentleman from Greene says, that I am inconsistent in hav-
ing advocated a large representation in the Legislature, and in now
advocating an increase in the veto power; I maintain that it is a
correct position. I entertain a desire to see a full and fair represen-
tation of the people in the popular branch of the Legislature,
because this is the department which most closely and intimately
reflects the wishes and interests of the people; but for the very
reason that this branch also represents the passions and prejudices
of the mass, and although generally desiring to do what they con-
sider to be for the best; yet as they are occasionally carried away
by sudden impulses, incident to all popular bodies, the executive
should therefore be invested with this negative, this counteracting
power. In this consists the beauty, harmony and science of our
system.

If, continued Mr. M., our government is to consist of the
three co-ordinate branches, distinct and independent of each
other, and the executive is to stand upon an equality with the other
branches; this increase of the veto power is indispensable to pro-
tect the executive and other departments from the encroachments
of the legislature; I am firmly of opinion that this slight increase

414 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of the veto power, will operate beneficially for the interests of the
State hereafter. I feel assured that it cannot be productive of
injury under the present organization of the department, and the
little patronage that we are about to allow to the governor. If
we were going to have in our constitution a provision giving to the
governor a large appointing power; if we were about to confer
extensive patronage upon him, ^o as greatly to increase his influ-
ence, the matter would than assume a different aspect, and in that
event, I would be less inclined to confer upon him the veto power,
but that is not the case. It is doubtful whether he will have the
appointment of a single officer. He is to have no patronage; he is
to be a mere shadow, an image, a sign of the sovereignty of the
State; a representation of that sovereignty in name only, without
possessing any of the attributes which belong to it; and yet gentle-
men profess great fear and alarm at the proposition for investing
the executive branch of the government, with the slight increase
which is now proposed. In my judgment in view of all these
considerations, the executive could never exert sufficient influence
over the Legislature to check its progress from any extraneous
causes; but if it exercise an influence at all, it must be from the
mere intellectual and moral power which a great and good man
only could possess, and that check, in all probability, would be
for good and not for evil. I am therefore in favor of this increase
of the veto power.

Mr. SINGLETON said, he was in favor yesterday of striking
out that part of the section so as to leave the power with a majority
of the legislature to pass a bill after the veto of the governor,
but as he was satisfied from the vote of the convention yesterday,
that a majority of the convention were not in favor of that prop-
osition; he was now willing to vote for the proposition for the
gentleman from Schuyler. He was not one of those who would
go for no proposition which did not originate with themselves.
He was willing, if he could not get the proposition he wanted, to
take the best that he could get. He believed that a majority of
the Legislature ought to have the power, but as it was impossible
to obtain a vote of the convention in favor of that proposition;
he was for making the evil as small as possible, by taking the
proposition for a majority of three-fifths. It was clearly a party

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 415

question, and he was willing to compromise, in order to obtain
the best terms that he could get. It was the first time, however,
that he had ever offered to compromise, but he felt it to be a duty,
which he owed to his constituents, that he should do so on this
occasion, and it was only necessary to see the path of his duty
before him, and he was ready to follow it. He was ready then to
meet gentlemen on half-way grounds. There were serious objec-
tions against the proposition as contained in the report of the
committee, requiring a majority of two-thirds to pass a bill after
a veto of the governor. — That proposition would make the gover-
nor equal to sixty-six members — fifteen more than a majority. —
The proposition of the gentleman from Schuyler would make him
equal to a majority and nine over — a considerable reduction.
This proposition, then, was preferable to the first.

Mr. SMITH of Mason said:

Mr. Chairman, — I have not trespassed upon the time of the
Convention heretofore to any extent, and will not now inflict a
regular speech upon the committee. I would not utter a word
upon this subject did I not see a disposition to adopt the report of
the committee before us without sufficient investigation; and I
feel it to be my duty to make known the wishes of my constituents
upon this subject; and when this is done, I am certain it will have
more influence with the committee, than any argument that I
can present. It will at least have the influence, so far as it goes,
in making up the public opinion of the whole State. Certainly
no gentleman here is willing to insert any provision in the con-
stitution that will not meet with the approbation of the people
of the State.

If I know the opinion of the people of the two counties which
I have the honor to represent on this floor, upon any one subject,
it is on this. I consider myself directly instructed on this subject.
The question of giving to the governor the veto power, was one
of the issues between my honorable competitor and myself, when
canvassing for a seat in this Convention. I was opposed to giving
the governor this high power then, and am more opposed to it
now. Considering what we have already done in this Conven-
tion, if there ever was a necessity for provision of this sort in the
constitution, there certainly is not now. Gentlemen want the

41 6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

governor to have the power to hold it as a check upon the legis-
lature;— and gentlemen refer to the excesses of former legislation
to show the necessity for such a check being placed in the new
constitution, to prevent a repetition of similar excesses in the
future. Gentlemen refer to the great internal improvement law,
that has saddled upon the State the immense debt that hangs
over us; and say that if Gov. Duncan had had the veto power, he
would have used it, and would have prevented this error of the
legislature. This all may be true enough; but gentlemen forget
that we have already provided in the amendments that we have
reported in the committee of the whole, against the evils of a
public debt. We have provided that the legislature shall not
pledge'the faith of the State for any sum exceeding fifty thousand
dollars, except in cases of war and insurrection, without first
referring the matter to the people at a general election, and then
it must meet with the approval of a majority. This is placing
the veto power where it belongs. The people have to foot the
bills, and they should hold the veto. Does anyone, sir, suppose
that the people of Illinois would have ratified a debt of fourteen
millions of dollars? They would have been as clear of that as
was Gov. Duncan. They would have vetoed the matter; and,
sir, I cannot see the necessity of providing a veto power to be used
first by the governor and then by the people. In this case, if the
governor thinks proper, the matter or bill may pass to the people,
or if he choose otherwise he can veto the bill and the people will
never get a chance at it, unless a majority of two-thirds of both
branches of the legislature over-rule the veto. In that case it
comes before the people, and if they veto it the matter is settled.
There are propositions also before this convention which I
think will prevail, which will give the people a veto upon all bank
charters. Then, I ask, what necessity is there in giving an addi-
tional veto to the governor.? Sir, the legislative department of
the government of Illinois has become the most unpopular branch
of the government, and I believe it is deservedly so. And the
cause of this is in the large amount of power conferred by the old
constitution upon that department. Had the executive hadfthe
same power conferred upon it, it would now be as unpopular as is
the legislature.

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 417

The proper way, as I consider, to prevent the abuse of power
is in not conferring it. The legislature has given more dissatis-
faction in taking such large pay for themselves, and in consuming
so much time unnecessarily, than in any other one matter; and
we have already provided against this abuse, by limiting the pay
and the time. This is all called for by the people; but I do not
think that the people want us to take power from the legislature
and give it to the governor. If you give power to any one of
the three departments of government, we must expect they will
use it, and if you give the governor the power of becoming dan-
gerous, you may expect that he will become so. The people
want to hold in their own hands such power as we may take from
the legislature, and not give it to the governor.

Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to giving the veto power to the
governor, both on the ground of expediency and principle. I
agree with the gentleman from Peoria, that the doctrine is anti-
republican, and that it is contrary to the genius and spirit of a
representative government. It is, sir, a kingly prerogative, and
should be left in the hands of the sovereign people. There seems
to be a disposition in this body to confer too much power upon
the governor and to render the legislature powerless. You have
restricted the legislature by your action in a called session to
just such subjects as the governor may propose to them, and now
you propose to give to him the veto power. If you succeed in
one case, the legislature has the power of originating and pro-
posing such laws as they may pass, — but in the other, they are
denied the right, and you give the governor a veto in all cases.
It does seem to me that if this plan succeeds, that the legislature,
who are the legitimate representatives of the people, will cut but
a poor figure in Illinois. I ask, sir, what use is there in having
a legislature if you render it powerless, and place it under the
control of the executive of the State — a one-man power— the repre-
sentative of monarchy?

Mr. BOND said he was opposed to the proposition of the
gentleman from Schuyler, for the reason, first, that the veto power
was not an executive power; and in the next place, that if there
was any necessity for guards and restrictions to be thrown around
the legislative department, that had been sufficiently done already.

41 8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

We have provided, continued Mr. Bond, as a security against
improvident legislation, that no bill shall become a law unless it
shall have received the votes of a majority of the members of the
legislature. The sophistry of the arguments of gentlemen con-
sist in this: that they do not say that it is a legislative power.
If they would have the governor participate in legislation, why
not provide a place for him to come in and engage in discussion,
that his opinions may be duly weighed and properly appreciated?
Again, the bill of rights provides that the people shall have the
right at all times to assemble together in a peaceable manner, and
petition for a right of grievances. Why, we might as well provide
at once, that the people shall petition the governor and his legis-
lature.

Sir, I am utterly hostile to giving the governor a power equal
to that possessed by the people's representatives in the general
assembly. I do not think it is such a power as he ought to exer-
cise.— All that he should be called upon to do, is to sanction or
not to sanction the acts of the legislature; and if he do not sanction
their acts, there will be a sufficient guard thrown around legislation
by providing that a majority shall pass such acts before they shall
be permitted to go into effect.

The veto power is not suited to this meridian. — It might have
been a proper conservative power, in the earlier period of the
republic. But it pre-supposes that the governor of the State has
some knowledge of our constitution and laws; that he shall be a
man of learning; that he shall possess a knowledge of the affairs
of government; above all, it pre-supposes him a man of common
sense, and common honesty; and a man who can take a survey of
things as they really are, and can act with a broad range of mind,
can take in the whole community, and lose sight of everything
but the good of the entire community. I might perhaps jocularly
say, that I was opposed to this power because the people have
greatly suffered from overtrading, and I meant to take from the
different departments of the government, the fictitious capital upon
which they have been trading. I am not willing to acknowledge
the governor is superior to two-thirds or three-fifths of the mem-
bers elected. Some gentlemen contend that he ought to have
the veto power, because he acts for the people of the entire State;

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 419

whilst the members of the legislature, indiscriminately, represent
particular districts. Sir, can he know the wishes of the people
better than members of the legislature, who come fresh from the
people themselves? If he can, he is something superior to what I
have heretofore seen of the qualifications combined in a governor
of Illinois; and I believe the responsibility is greater, in an individ-
ual who comes immediately from the people. Believing this, and
believing also, that as a general rule, they are as capable of dis-
criminating the wants of the people, and as honest and faithful
in carrying them out, I never can consent to give my support to
a proposition that will put it into the power of the executive to
deprive the people of what they desire should be done.

Mr. WOODSON rose and asked the indulgence of the Con-
vention, in order that he might, without consuming more than a
very few moments of their time, explain the position which he
occupied in reference to this subject. It was not his intention,
he said, to enter into a discussion of the veto power. It was
unnecessary to do so. He found that a majority of the Conven-
tion was disposed to retain that power in the constitution, and as
it was to be retained in the constitution, he hoped it would be
retained in its least objectionable form.

He was conscientious in saying that he believed it was a power
which did not belong to a government such as ours. It was
contrary, he thought, to the genius of our institutions. If the
government was to be based upon the will of the people, then the
veto, proceeding as it did, from one man, was to say the least of
it, highly objectionable.

In discussing this question, continued Mr. Woodson, I would
not have alluded to vetoes which have heretofore been given,
because I am averse to enkindle anything like party feeling, or
introduce anything like party considerations; but I may remark
here, that I do not think the veto power, as exercised by the
President of the United States, should be exercised by the Gover-
nor of Illinois. There are reasons why the President should have
the right to exercise the power in his capacity as President, which
do not apply to the Governor of a State. In the first place, the
executive of the United States is clothed with vast executive
patronage, growing out of our foreign relations as well as our

420 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

domestic affairs, which makes it extremely necessary that he
should sometimes exercise the veto power; but none of these
reasons apply to the Governor of a State. I adopt the reason
assigned by those who have written commentaries upon the United
States government for giving this power. — Judge Story says:

' 'There is a natural tendency in the legislative department to
encroach upon the executive, and to absorb all the power of the
government." Now whatever tendency exists on the part of the
legislature of the United States government, to encroach upon
the executive, the same tendency does not exist in the State gov-
ernment. It cannot exist, as I shall show presently. Our State
legislature is restricted and tied down, so that no inconvenience
can possibly arise. The reason assigned for requiring the exercise
of the veto power, is that it may be used as a check upon improvi-
dent, unwise and rash legislation. This is the only reason urged
in favor of the exercise of that power here. Well, I think I can
convince this convention that it will not apply to Illinois under
the constitution which we are about to adopt. Before I touch
this, however, I will allude to the remarks made by the gentleman
from Fulton, regarding the veto power. He says it has never been
exercised in any case in which it has not been universally approved
by the people. Now I am not so sure that this is the case; I
doubt that it has invariably received their approval. Sir, there is
difference of opinion upon that subject; but it is not necessary to
discuss that question in connection with the question which is
now before the convention.

I differ most widely with the gentleman at any rate. The veto
of Mr. Polk of the western river and harbor bill, has certainly not
been approved. — I ask the gentleman to pause and reflect, and
tell me whether there has not been one universal voice of condem-
nation in regard to that veto. Sir, have not men of all parties
recently met at Chicago and expressed their disapprobation of the
veto of that bill ? Why unquestionably; there is scarcely a dissent-
ing voice; and I remark also, that the gentleman cannot point out
a single principle— a single object in that bill which has not at
some time or other received the sanction of Presidents Jackson
and Van Buren. However I will not consume the time by dwelling
upon this subject. It is not necessary on this occasion.

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 421

I have been struck with the peculiar inconsistency (if I may
use the expression without designing anything offensive) of the
gentlemen from Schuyler and Fulton, on this subject. Sir, when
the question came up as to the number of members of which the
legislature should be composed the gentleman from Schuyler was
eloquent upon what he called an infringement of the rights of the
people — endangering their liberties, and yet, when a proposition
is made by which the powers of that very people are to be cur-
tailed, the gentleman can find an argument in any-thing and every-
thing, to check the power of the representatives of the people.

Sir, the representatives in the general assembly come directly
from the people, they are the people; and to the people alone
should they be accountable and not to the executive. But, sir,
I come now to the question, and wish to call the attention of the
committee to it. Is there not sufficient restriction at this time
upon the legislative action of the State.^ I admit, that there has
been one single case, that of the internal improvement system,
in which, if the governor had exerted the veto power, the State
would have been in a better condition at this day. — But that is a
single case; such a case cannot again occur under the restrictions
which we have placed around the legislation of the State. It is
impossible. But, will gentlemen suffer themselves to be frightened
from their propriety by this single case? Are all principles to be
surrendered because one single case existed which would have
been an exception.? No, sir, we should look at the consequences
of an act in all future time; we should consider how the country is
to be affected by it hereafter.

I desire to call the attention of the committee to some restric-
tions which they have thrown around the legislative department
of the government. [Mr. W. referred to various amended pro-
visions of the report of the legislative committee.]

No bill shall become a law unless it received the sanction of a
majority of all the members elected. That is, said Mr. W., an
important restriction; it was not a provision of the old constitution,
it never existed in the old constitution. A majority of t he quorum
could pass a law without the yeas and nays. Now, it cannot be
done without the yeas and nays, and without a majority of the
whole number of members elected. Again, the members of the

422 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

legislature are to receive but two dollars per day for the first
forty-two days, and one dollar a day thereafter. There is another
important restriction on the action of the legislature; the sessions,
instead of being almost unlimited as formerly, are now limited
to a period of time which is barely sufficient for the transaction of
the necessary public business; and another most important re-
striction is, that no bill for the payment of a claim against the
State can be passed, unless the claim shall have been previously
adjudicated before some judicial tribunal. Now I ask, what
danger there is to be apprehended from legislative action under all
these restrictions? There is no danger in future, regarding the
passage of bills for internal improvement for which the people are
to be saddled with taxation. State legislation is further restricted
by the manner in which the legislature is constituted; the Senate
acting as a check upon the House, and the House a check upon
the Senate. This is what Franklin aptly compared to a wagon
with one horse hitched before and another behind, each pulling
in diflFerent directions. Gentlemen here, are not only for putting a
horse before, and a horse behind, but for putting so great a weight
upon the wagon, that it cannot be moved. If you invest the gov-
ernor with the veto power, there will be such a weight imposed
as will perhaps entirely clog the wheels of legislation. Suppose
the governor should at any time come in collision with the legis-
lature, so that feelings of hostility will be aroused; (and this is
not at all improbable,) under the veto power, the governor might
veto every law passed by the legislature. Suppose this conven-
tion should have refused to require the governor to sign bills
when he has constitutional objections against their passage; this
power will be illimitable, whether his objections are constitutional
or otherwise. Such a restriction upon legislation, I think, is not
in accordance with the genius and spirit of this government; a
government derived from the people.

I merely throw out this, said Mr. Woodson, as an offset to the
assertion of the gentleman from Fulton, that the people had
always expressed their approval in every case in which a veto has
been given. It is a remarkable fact, and one which stands out
in bold relief, in the history of this State, that the men who voted
for that law, have been sustained by the people, and many of

FRIDAY, JULY i6, 1847 423

them are now holding high offices in the State. When I rose I
did not intend to detain the committee so long as I have, and I
beg pardon for trespassing on their time. The people being the
the source of all power, the legislature should be accountable to
the people for their acts, and not to the executive.

These are my views, and I cannot reconcile it to my mind,
that the will of one man should be permitted to control the action
of the legislature. If it is to be a representative government at
all, I want the people to rule through their representatives, and I
want these representatives to be amenable solely to the people.
This is the safest course. — Sir, the veto power of the governor, even
if a bare majority may set aside his veto, is of itself a sufficient check.

Let us examine how bills are passed. In the first place, a bill
has to be read on three several days, unless three-fourths of the
members agree to dispense with that rule, and the same formality
takes place in both Houses. Here is sufficient time for reflection.
The bill then goes to the executive and he vetoes it; and if they
think proper upon reconsideration to pass the bill again by a
majority, that I think is a sufficient check, a sufficient safe-guard
against hasty and inconsiderate legislation, and I cannot consent
by my vote that the legislature should be controlled by any
further restriction than this. Do the people require that there
should be any more restriction? As far as I know the question
has never been mooted or discussed before the people of the
country; but I believe they will be satisfied with the Constitution
if you leave it as it is at present, in regard to this matter. There
can be no objection to leaving it as it is. But I perceive that this
Convention is determined that the veto power shall be exercised, but
why they should be so desirous of introducing it, I cannot conceive.

Mr. WOODSON referred to the veto of Gov. Duncan and re-
marked that Duncan was less popular after that veto than before.
As iniquitous as the law was, which was vetoed by him, yet the
people returned to the legislature time and again the very men
who voted for the law. The men who held the very highest offices
in the State afterwards, were those who voted for that law.]

Mr. WEAD addressed the Convention on this subject, (his

remarks will appear in our next)^' until the hour of adjournment.

^ Wead's remarks do not appear in later issues of the Illinois Stale Reg-
ister nor in the Sangamo Journal.

XXXII. SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Green of Tazewell.

Mr. DEITZ presented a petition in relation to the appointment
of a superintendent of schools. Referred to the committee on
Education.

Mr. TURNER presented a petition praying the abolition of
capital punishment. Referred to the committee on the Judi-
ciary.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the
whole — Mr. Grain in the Chair.

The question pending was on the two motions to insert "major-
ity" and "three-fifths."

Mr. HARVEY briefly advocated the amendment to insert
"three-fifths," as he thought the "majority" was reducing the
effect of a veto to too small an importance.

Mr. WOODSON said, that it was manifest that the majority
of the Convention were in favor of retaining the veto power; and
if so, he was desirous that it should be adopted in its least objec-
tionable form — by the amendment proposing a majority of the
members elect. He opposed the veto power under any circum-
stances, as opposed to the spirit and genius of our government,
which recognize all power as vested in the people, and from them
in their representatives; and which was defeated by giving to one
man authority to obstruct the passage of any law which those
representatives thought it proper, wise and expedient to enact.
There might be some propriety in vesting the President of the
United States with some such power, but none that we should
confer it upon a Governor of a state. The President has vast and
extended patronage, and is the representative of the whole Union,
and all its diversified interests, and it may be necessary at times
for him to interpose this power, to prevent wrongs upon those
interests by encroachments by the Legislature. Judge Storv
has said, that one reason for the veto was that there is a natural
tendency in the legislative department to encroach upon the duties
424

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 425

and rights of the others. This may be true in respect to the
national legislature, but is not so in the state governments, nor in
this state, which has been shown by the action of this Convention —
which he would refer to presently. Another reason given, is
that it is a safe-guard against rash and hasty legislation. What
further safe-guard is required than those already provided by the
committee in its action upon the report of the Legislative com-
mittee?

He asked leave to refer to the remark made by Mr. Wead,
"that in no case, where the veto power had been exercised, did
it fail in receiving the universal approval of the people," and he
would say to that gentleman that he was not altogether satisfied
that the late veto of President Polk was so universally approved.
In the western part of the country all parties were unanimous, and
the great convention, the largest held in this section of the coun-
try, at Chicago, had united in the denunciation of that act.
There was not a single item in that bill which had not, at one time
or another, received the approbation of Presidents Jackson or
Van Buren.

Mr. W. then referred in detail to the reduction of the number
of the Legislature, the many checks, re[s]trictions and prohibi-
tions thrown around its action, the denial to it of the power it had
heretofore of appropriating moneys upon private claims, and urged
that all these were sufficient to prevent hasty or improvident
legislation. He thought that the case of the internal improvement
act was one which might not occur again in a century, and was not
a sufficient argument to justify a departure from correct principles.
And even if he was sure that the veto power would not be exer-
cised, except on conservative grounds, still he would oppose it,
because he believed it opposed to the spirit and genius of our
government. He believed that if the Governor had the veto
power at the time of the passage of the internal improvement act,
and had exercised it, that the people would have still demanded
and succeeded in passing that act; for they had shown their
approval of the men who had carried it through, by elevating
them even to this day to the highest offices in the State; one, at
least, of our U. S. Senators was in favor of that act.

Mr. NORTHCOTT followed in opposition to the veto on

426 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

grounds similar to those expressed by those preceding him on the
same side.

[Mr. NORTHCOTT said/» he did not beheve that he could do
justice to his feelings, or his constituents, without occupying the
time of the committee, while he submitted a few remarks for their
candid and deliberate consideration; and if an apology is necessary,
mine is found in the vast importance of the question before us;
a question that involves great principles, the wise or unwise settle-
ment of which, will tell for weal or woe, during the existence of the
instrument we are now framing.

We have provided for three separate and distinct branches of
government — Legislative, Executive and Judicial. Correct prin-
ciple and good policy alike dictate, that each of these bodies of
magistracy, in the performance of their various duties, should be
independent of each other. The Legislative department is con-
stituted for the purpose of framing laws for the government and
well being of society. The Judiciary, for the purpose of adjudi-
cating upon, and expounding those laws: and the Executive, for
the purpose of seeing them faithfully executed. Sir, it would be
just as reasonable to declare that the judiciary should, under the
new constitution, exercise a controlling influence over either of the
other departments, as that the governor should control the legis-
lature. Indeed, it would be equally correct in theory, and ex-
pedient in practice, to give the governor the right to veto the
judgments and decisions of the supreme court, as to vest him with
power to veto the acts of the general assembly.

The object of the veto power, say its advocates, is to prevent
hasty legislation. Are there no hasty decisions of the supreme
court? Are not individuals frequently injured by those decisions?
Most certainly they are. Then, gentlemen to be consistent,
should carry out the principle, and say to that body, "What you
can do in accordance with the will of the governor, that do: thus
far shalt thou go, and no farther.' ' If a concurrence of two-thirds
of the legislature be made necessary to pass a bill that could not
obtain the Governor's sanction, it would give him complete con-
trol of the law-making power; it would become a pliant tool in his

'" This speech by Northcott is taken from the Sangamo Journal, July 23.

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 4^7

hand to do his bidding; and, sir, we had just as well abolish it at
once.

IVIr. Chairman, I utterly deprecate the introduction of party
discussion here; but such are the circumstances by which I am
surrounded, that I cannot do justice to the subject without glanc-
ing at a few of the circumstances that make a part of our State
and National history for a few years past. I might have been
spared the painful task, had it not been for the very extraordinary
speech delivered here on yesterday, by the gentleman from Fulton.
He has hurled defiance at us. Mark his singular language: "I
defy those on the other side to show a solitary instance where the
veto power has been wielded to the injury of the country."
Again, speaking of vetoes, he says: — "They have been invariably
sustained by the American people." He has thrown down the
gauntlet. I take it up. Sir, the pecuniary embarrassments of
this State, past, present and future, are the legitimate results of
the exercise of that power; I mean the vetoes of the chief magis-
trate of this confederacy. When called upon to sign a bill for the
recharter of the United States Bank, he refused, and in his message
to Congress giving his reasons for that refusal, recommended to
the States the creation of State banks, and to the banks liberal
discounts. This coming from such a source, from a man the high-
est in power, first in the hearts of the American people, a hero, a
patriot and a statesman, carried with it immense weight. Accord-
ingly banks sprung up, like mushroons during the sable shades of
night, and scattered their promises to pay, thick as falling leaves
of autumn.

Side by side with this bank veto, I will place another, similar
in its character, and similar in its tendency, both of which worked
conjointly to produce that overwhelming ruin, that came very
near swallowing up our whole country in general, and Illinois in
particular; I mean that of the Maysville road bill, in which the
President recommended the States should construct their own
works of internal improvement. That recommendation worked
like magic, and the States, both old and new, weak and strong,
indiscriminately, began these works with a vengeance. Magnifi-
cent schemes were planned and commenced; money was borrowed
from abroad without stint, and paid to agents, contractors and

428 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

laborers, and from them it found its way into all the departments
of business. This money, obtained by loans, and augmented by
the issues of a thousand banks, all thrown into circulation at
once, — all seeking profitable investment, — caused the sage to be-
come visionary, the heretofore wise and prudent lost their caution
and forethought, the nation became involved in debt, — States,
corporations and individuals followed the example; the agricultural
and manufacturing interests were neglected, and we, who should
be able to feed the world, compelled to look to Europe for the
means of subsistence. The balance of trade turned against us.
Specie was demanded to make up the deficit. This caused a run
on the banks for cash, deprived them of the means of redeeming
their out-standing notes, which had been previously receivable for
all government dues, and the "specie circular" was issued to save
the government from loss; and this caused a further run on the
banks, and they suspended specie payments. This created alarm
all over the country, and spread consternation among our creditors
abroad; no more money could be borrowed; the energies of our
State, and of many other States, were completely paralyzed; and
the people who were in 1832 progressing most speedily, and with
the most apparent certainty in the acquisition of wealth, of fame
and of happiness, in a short time were prostrated. The nation
was scarcely able to redeem its plighted faith. States for a time,
at least, driven to repudiation. Banks broke; individuals became
insolvent, and their property sold at public outcry; credit was
destroyed; confidence between man and man had given way to a
spirit of distrust; ruin, like a stream of molten lava, had completely
over-run the fair face of our lovely country; from Maine to Lou-
isiana,— from our own blue lakes to the Gulf of Mexico, — all was
a scene of desolation; scarcely was a green spot left on which the
eye of the soul-stricken patriot could rest.

These are the financial evils resulting from these vetoes; and
poor Illinois stands forth as a conspicuous witness of these asser-
tions; the monument she has erected in memory of her fall is in
the shape of a State debt of fifteen millions— the existence of
which, I fear, will be co-equal with that of the pyramids of Egypt.

This veto was the commencement of an era in the executive
history of this country.— Up to this period, moderation had char-

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 429

acterized the action of our chief magistrates; the balance of power
had been preserved, and the co-ordinate departments had kept
within their legitimate spheres. In the midst of the delusive and
ephemeral prosperity that followed this assumption of executive
responsibility, and the accompanying recommendations, the people
were called upon to exercise the elective franchise, in the choice
of a chief magistrate. The overwhelming majority he received,
was taken by himself and friends as a direct approval of that act.

The opponents of the veto had prophesied convulsions and
disasters, whilst its advocates sung the syren song of peace, lulling
the fears of an unsuspecting people, and told of still better times
ahead. This delusive state of things, and not the popularity of
the veto, elected him for a second term.

But the Rubicon was crossed. The President held himself as
the people's immediate representative, and should therefore con-
trol all departments of the government, and frpm that day to this,
with the exception of one short month, "I take the responsibility"
has been the motto of every President. That day proscription
commenced, wholesale and retail, from custom house officer to the
village post-master, all must make room for the favorites of the
President; from that time Congress had to commence carving its
work to suit the views of the executive, and when they have
omitted to do it, the executive has interposed his fiat, and said,
"it shall not be so." At one time, the President by repeated
importunities received from Congress the Nation's purse; and while
he held it meekly in one hand, reached out the other, and implor-
ingly solicited the sword; the people's representatives answered.
No. And at the then ensuing presidential election, the people,
rising in their majestic might, answered in tones of thunder,
"never." This was the death blow to executive usurpation.
But it slumbered only for a time, it was galvanized in 1844, by
the miracle working names of "Texas and Oregon;" in its galvan-
ized state it has brought us into a war with a neighboring republic;
now it moves, not as if guided by intellect, it exhibits but the
convulsive throes of a galvanized corpse; and, sir, believe me or
not, in the latter part of the year 1848, the people will, by the
election of Gen. Taylor, bury it so deep, that Gabriel's trumpet
will not cause it to twitch a single muscle.

430 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The foregoing presents the great danger that our liberties are
in from the veto power, as now wielded by the President; and in
view of all these circumstances, who can say that vetoes are always
right? And if productive of much evil, shall we engraft it in our
new constitution? Shall we subject ourselves to the usurpation
by one man, of such unlimited power, and enable him to defeat
the popular will? I trust not, sir. Some gentlemen here, say
that it is but a negative power; that it enacts nothing. Causes
may arise in which it will have the same effect. Suppose a law
to be unpopular and mischievous in its tendency — the people call
loudly for its repeal — the majority of the legislature so determine;
but Mr. Governor says, no; — by his will he prolongs the existence
of a bad law. This, to a man of my humble capacities, looks like
exercising legislative powers by indirection, and I think cannot be
otherwise.

The gentleman from Schuyler says, "such powers should not
be given to a president, but that the governor should have them
by all means." Here is, I think, distinction without a difference;
if the principle is correct both should have such authority; if
wrong, as I think I have clearly shown both from fact and argu-
ment, neither. If a governor can prevent the enactment of good
laws, and the repeal of evil ones, by that power, I say withhold it
from him.

One other argument, Mr. Chairman, and I have done. The
people know the candidate for governor by his previous acts; the
candidates for the legislature they know personally — they con-
verse with them familiarly face to face, alsout their wants; and is
it to be expected that the governor, shut up in the city of Spring-
field, or in New York city acting as fund commissioner, can know
the views, the feelings, the wants and the interests of the people
of whom he has never seen one in ten far better than their immedi-
ate representatives fresh from among them? Sir, the idea is pre-
posterous. I hope the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Sangamon will prevail.]

Mr. DAVIS of Massac proposed to submit a few remarks for
the consideration of the committee, in answer to the extraordinary
arguments advanced by a gentleman on the other side of the ques-

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 431

tion. — The gentleman from Hardin, in his remarks the other day,
set out by saying that the veto power ought not to be exercised in
a repubHc; that it was a concomitant of monarchy. And the
gentleman from Greene, if I understood him, declared in his
place to-day, that the power should not be exercised under a
government such as ours; and I understood the gentleman who
has just resumed his seat to declare that much, nay, almost all, of
the evils of which we have had to complain for the last ten or
fifteen years, have resulted from the exercise of the veto power.
Sir, I am at a loss to know to what part of our national history
gentlemen will go to support the assertions which they have made
on this occasion. Sir, if it be the exercise of a power closely allied
to monarchy, if it be drawn from the mother country from which
we have drawn most of our notions of government, and if expe-
rience has demonstrated, as I think it has, that its exercise has
tended to promote the interests of the whole country, it seems to
me that gentlemen have stepped very far out of their proper
sphere when they have denounced the advocates of the power as
favorites and supporters of monarchy. Will they pretend to say
that Washington, the first man who exercised the power in our
national government, was an advocate of monarchy, or of any
thing that savored of despotism ? Will they say that the great and
good Madison was an advocate of monarchy? I trust that gentle-
men do not mean to asperse the memories of those illustrious men
in such a manner. In my opinion the exercise of the veto power,
upon proper occasions, is one of the most essential and important
objects that can be secured. It is, it may well be said, indispen-
sable to check hasty and inconsiderate legislation; and if we go
back over the whole history of legislation we will find that the
exertion of this power has on no occasion been condemned, or even
disapproved of by the people. It has been said, however,
that if the power is invested in the Governor at all, it should be
only a majority power; that it should only require a majority to
pass the law notwithstanding the veto. I ask what benefit
could result to the legislation of the country from the exercise of
the veto power, if a bare majority can come in and pass a law
over the veto. What benefit could result to the legislation of the
country when a majority, incensed perhaps by the exercise of the

432 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

veto power, may enact the law notwithstanding the veto. Mem-
bers of the Legislature, instead of being conciliated by the argu-
ments contained in the veto message, will naturally be the more
strongly set in their opinions than before; they will be the more
firmly fixed in their determination to pass the law, in consequence
of the veto. Every man has a certain pride of opinion, and dis-
likes very much to be driven from a position which he has taken;
he will not be willing to renounce the opinions he has once expressed,
although the arguments contained in the veto message may be
sufficient to convince any unprejudiced mind. He is not willing
to recede from the position he has assumed and admit that he was
wrong. No, sir, that pride of opinion which every man has to a
greater or less extent, will induce him to adhere to that position,
and instead of conciliating, instead of gaining any thing, the
executive will lose everything. But the gentleman from Greene
tells us that there is no necessity for the exertion of this power in
this state, after the legislative power shall have been narrowed
down, as it will be, to almost nothing. And one argument made
use of by the honorable gentleman is, that two dollars per day
being the pay of members of the Legislature, it is, consequently,
to be presumed that they will not do wrong. Sir, this is, in
my judgment, the strongest argument that can be made. T\yo
dollars being the per diem of members, we are, consequently, to
have good and enlightened legislation. I confess, Mr. President,
that I should be inclined to apprehend the contrary. No, sir, it
will ensure entrance into your legislative halls hereafter of men
who have not the capacity for legislation, and who cannot be
controlled by any power whatever. This, then, instead of being
an argument in favor of the gentleman's position, is the most
potent argument for extending the exercise to the utmost extent
which its advocates desire. But, says the gentleman from Greene,
"it is contrary to the genius of our institutions to place the Execu-
tive over the heads of the people, by giving him such a power as
this." Let me tell the gentleman, that it is not the disposition
of the advocates of the veto power, to place the Executive over
the heads of the people, but it is the disposition of those who advo-
cate the exercise of the veto power, to enable the Governor, who is
the representative of the whole people, to control the acts of their

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 433

dishonest agents, for all experience has shown that, however honest
and upright the representatives of the people for the most part
are, bad men will sometimes find their way into legislative assem-
blies. It is not a restraint upon the people, but is a restraint upon
the public agents of the people. It is not intended to control the
people, for the people are not here, as in a pure democracy, in
person; they are here by their representatives, and it sometimes
turns out that the representatives are not the true exponents of
their wishes. There are districts represented in this Convention
by individuals who do not know the wishes of the people, or who,
if they do know the public sentiment in their districts, do not
truly represent that public sentiment. This will ever be the case,
and the exertion of the veto power is necessary for that very
reason. Then, in the mode of conducting the elections, it some-
times turns out that we cannot secure the return of such men as
will carry out the real wishes of the people.

But, sir, it is said, because the Legislature will be limited in
the duration of its sessions, therefore there is no necessity for the
exercise of this power. Sir, this very reason constitutes, to my
mind, an argument for its exercise. For, if you limit the Legisla-
ture to short sessions, the business will necessarily be hurried; the
inevitable result will be the most hasty and inconsiderate legisla-
tion. Let this matter, then, rest with the Executive, who can
look calmly and deliberately upon the acts of the legislature, and
view them in all their phases and aspects; and if he be the faithful
representative of the people — if he be an upright public servant —
he will bring his honest heart and intelligent understanding to the
correction of the abuses which hasty and inconsiderate legislation
would occasion. Have we not all witnessed the haste with which
bill after bill, and act after act, have been passed into laws about
the period of the winding up of the business of the session of the
Legislature? Very few members are able to know what pro-
visions are contained in those acts; if they happened to be wise
ones, it is merely a fortunate accident, and if they happened to
be unwise, it is nothing more than we had reason to expect. But,
sir, one gentleman has gone into the history of the currency of the
country; he has spoken of the veto of the venerated chief whose
spirit has returned to the God who gave it. He has brought this

434 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

matter into the arena. Sir, I shall not enter into a party discus-
sion in this Convention, unless compelled to do so in self defence,
and I trust there will be no compulsion. But, sir, it is said, that
it is not necessary in a state government as in the federal govern-
ment that this power should be exercised. I should be glad if any
gentleman would tell me why it is not necessary to be sometimes
exercised in a state government. Is it to be presumed that the
representatives of the people of this state are endowed with more
wisdom and intelligence than the representatives of the people in
the national legislature? Is it to be presumed that there will be
less of hasty legislation in a state legislature, than in the national
legislature. I think not, and I think very few will disagree with
me when it is considered that the Senate of the United States is
composed of the wisest men in this confederacy, they constitute
a check upon the hasty legislation of the popular branch, just as the
veto of the President constitutes a check upon both. The Senate
is a check upon the House of Representatives, and e converse, but
all experience has shown that these checks, wholesome as they are,
great as they are, are not sufficient to restrain men in the enact-
ment of injurious laws. All experience has shown that something
more is needed, and that is the placing in the hands of the execu-
tive, the power to arrest unwise and unwholesome exactments,
before they inflict upon the country, the irremediable evil of their
blighting influences. I have, perhaps, sir, detained the committee
as long as I ought to do; I trust that if either of the propositions
to amend should prevail, it will be that of the gentleman from
Schuyler. I would prefer two-thirds as being better than three-
fifths, but if I can get no better proposition than that of the gen-
tleman from Schuyler, I shall, when the vote is taken, avail myself
of it, for I believe that the exercise of the veto power is essential
in order that the state of Illinois, peculiarly blessed as she may be,
if governed by wise councils, may not see her prospects blighted by
unwise legislation, but may hereafter shine forth as the brightest
star m the constellation states.

Mr. ARCHER said, that although this question had already
been discussed, and he had intended to have said nothing upon
it, yet he felt constrained, after what had been said by those who
opposed the introduction into the constitution, to present his views.

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 435

as it was one upon which the people of the part of the state he
represented felt great interest in, and he considered it a duty due
to himself and them to lay those views before the committee.
He was in favor of the section reported by the committee, as
amended by the gentleman from McLean, which then, he believed,
would be in the same words that were used in the constitution of
the United States. He believed the veto to be the great and salu-
tary conservative power of all governments, and that Illinois
should be the last state, after the experience of the past, to give it
up. Have we not had enough of unwise, hasty and improvident
legislation to point out to us the necessity and importance of
guarding against it for the future? Out of such legislation had
grown the internal improvement acts, which had blasted the
prosperity and hopes of the young state, and raised up a debt
which our grand children will never see the day of its payment.
We should never abandon the only sure and constitutional mode
of preventing a recurrence of such things, and this veto power was
the most saving power to accomplish that end. It had well been
said by the gentleman from Massac, that Illinois was a state
which had been blessed by Heaven, but cursed by legislation, and
our people should be jealous of any attempt to wrest from the
constitution this mode of checking it for all time to come. Gentle-
men have said that this is a legislative power conferred upon the
Governor, enabling him to legislate for the state in opposition to
the will of their representatives; it is not a positive power, it is
only conferring upon him, who is the representative of the whole
people, the power of checking such legislation as may be deemed
unwise, hasty or unconstitutional. Is this legislative? It i[s],
as I said before, not a positive, but simply a negative power to
check what may be considered wrong. And what other power
have we left the Governor of this state? We have left him the
power of granting pardons and reprieves, and the veto; this last
it is now proposed to take away, and what I ask do gentlemen
desire him to be? Do they want to see the man chosen by the
people of the state to be their Governor made the tool of the Legis-
lature, to do whatever they may desire, to carry out what they may
choose to enact, no matter what his opinion may be? Do they
want him to occupy the chair of state, and look on at their pro-

436 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ceedings and see the most unwise, corrupt and unconstitutional
legislation without the power to interpose an objection, or stretch
forth his hand to save? If this power be denied, then again will
we have all the evils of over legislation, by combination and corrup-
tion. A man comes to the Legislature, we will say from Pike, or
Hardin, or Massac, who has some local measure which he is
anxious to have passed, one which may be of no sort of benefit
to the state, but merely desired by that member and a few
friends at home. He comes upon the floor of the House of Rep-
resentatives and there meets with other member[s] who have
similar designs to carry out, not one of which could be passed
alone, but by a system of combination and log-rolling they succeed
in obtaining its passage — the passage of them all. In such a case
as this — no improbable one, if we judge by what has been said by
old members of the Legislature on this floor, to whom do the
people look for protection against all the evils of this local legis-
lation? They look, sir, to the Governor. They call upon him to
avert the evil by the interposition of the power they have vested
in him. They say to him, our representatives have become cor-
rupt, they have betrayed the trusts we have reposed in them,
they are about to bring upon us the accumulated evils of local
legislation, and we look to you, as the representative of the whole
people of the state, and of all its great interests, to check it by your
constitutional power. Much has been said about "one man
power." There is attached to the exercise of this power by one
man a responsibility which is not felt by legislatures? If the
Governor permits a bill to become a law which is wrong and un-
constitutional, the whole responsibility of such an act rests upon
his head, and there only. He is the person responsible to the
people for such an act — upon him it falls entirely. But how
diff^erent when the Legislature may pass an act of this kind, for
what is the responsibility when divided among one hundred men?
No one of them feels, nor will take, nor can it be placed upon him,
the responsibility for such a violation of the duty they owed to
the people. "One man power!" is the cry. They desire that no
one man shall have this power. It is, say they, a "one man power"
arrayed against the representatives of the people. Why have a
Governor at all? Why have the executive power of the state

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 437

vested in "one man?" Why, if this power is so dangerous in the
hands of "one man," do you leave with him the right, by the
authority of his office, after the judiciary department of the state
have tried and condemned a man for a violation of the laws, to
interpose, to pardon that man and arrest the judicial proceedings?
The same argument will apply in this case against the exercise of
a "one man power," as it will in the exercise of the veto upon
the proceedings of the other department. It has been asked why
change the old constitution? I tell the gentlemen because the
innumerable evils of the past, which this power might have pre-
vented, call loudly for the change. The people of the state look
anxiously for it; the people of the county I represent demand
the adoption of the veto power in the hands of the Governor. Of
this I have no doubt, for I am sure I reflect their sentiments when I
say it should be adopted.

The gentleman from Menard has deprecated the introduction
of party feeling in this Convention. Though I am a party man,
warm and ardent in my feelings and opinions upon all party
subjects, I agree with him that they should not be introduced here;
and I regretted very much, when the gentleman from Hardin
(Mr. McCallen) declared that he would review the history of the
country regardless of what feelings it might stir up here. I then
thought, and I do now, that that was a most unfortunate remark.
It was one calculated to raise party feeling and excitement here,
and to draw out replies in the same spirit; but I have said I was
opposed to it and I will not allude further to his remarks. I will
only say that the people have passed upon all the acts of the
exercise of the veto power, and that in the case where the Bank of
the United States was put down by the veto upon its charter was
most signally and triumphantly sustained by the people in the
election of Mr. Van Buren — thus showing that they regarded its
exercise as one intended for the benefit and prosperity of the whole
people.

In conclusion, he said that he would vote, when they would be
called upon in convention, for the retention of the whole veto
power; that now if he could not get two-thirds he would vote for
three-fifths, for, in his opinion, the simple majority of the members
elect, was nothing more than no veto at all.

438 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. GRAHAM made some remarks in opposition to the veto
power, which our limits will not permit us to give.

Mr. SINGLETON was in favor of the Legislature having the
power to pass what laws they should think proper, independent
of the sanction of a Governor; but from the vote taken yesterday
he thought that the Convention had decided that the veto power
was to be retained. If this was to be the case, he would vote for
the three-fifths, because he believed that was the best he could get,
and as a matter of compromise. This was a party question and
one which he had not discussed before his constituents, and
he was willing to compromise between two-thirds and a majority,
by voting three-fifths. He had never compromised upon any
political or party question in his life, but upon this, as he did not
know exactly what the sentiments of his people were, he thought
something was due to them, and therefore he would vote for the
three-fifths, as in that case the evil would be presented in its least
objectionable shape. He believed the majority rule the proper
one, but he would not, for the reasons given, vote for it now. He
thought the veto gave the Governor a power and an influence upon
the representatives of the people which he should not possess. It
made him equal to forty-nine members of the House of Represent-
atives.

Mr. GREGG said, that he did not intend to have said anything
upon this subject, but he desired, as the matter was to be dis-
cussed, to express his views upon the subject.

He was one of those who believed that the veto power cannot
be abandoned without causing great danger to the Hberties of
the people, and producing a fatal tendency to the destruction of
our institutions and government. What was it. Is it the black
and hideous bug-bear that is held up to our view, as one conferring
upon the Governor legislative power? No sir, it is not. The
veto confers no legislative power upon the party holding it; it
is not a positive power, it is but a negative one. It is
simply the power to negative for a time the action of the Legisla-
ture when it is deemed rash, hasty or unconstitutional. This
was but a principle of our government. Our government is one
of checks and balances, and this is one of those checks. If we
abandon them and let the government go without these checks and

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 439

balances, it would fast run it to ruin and destruction for want
of the proper means to preserve its several departments, to pre-
serve their independence and proper functions. He was in favor
of keeping those checks and restrictions upon each depart-
ment of the government by the other, which were first introduced
by the framers of the constitution of the United States to pre-
serve the government, and this veto power was one which in their
wisdom they had incorporated in that constitution.

He had heard much said of the one man power, and of its power
and influence over the representatives of the people. There was
to his mind, nothing in a qualified veto power calculated to grind
down the liberties of or to oppress the people, but he thought it one
solely intended to check and drive back those destructive evils
and dangers of misguided and uncontrolled legislation. The evils of
an oligarchy were, in his opinion, far more dangerous and destructive
to the liberties of the people than was the exercise of this one man
power. All history shows it, all history proclaims it in tones that
cannot be misunderstood, that the evils of an oligarchy have been
the most dangerous and destructive. An abuse of power by one
man is not so bad as when it is the act of a body of men, in that
case you have the man, you have something tangible which you
can hold to the responsibihty of the act, and he can be punished for
that act; but how will you hold any to the responsibility where one
hundred individuals share and divide that responsibility? If one
man commit any act, it can be more easily traced, and he can be held
to more strict accountability than where that responsibility is shared
with ninety-nine others. He would ask the gentleman is not the
Governor of the state the representative of the people, of the whole
people, and in whom all sovereignty resides? Is he not their agent
who sits in the executive chair to carry out the authority delegated
to him? He was as much their representative as the members of
the Legislature who assemble in this hall, and more so; for they
are elected and were the representatives of local matters and local
influence; they owe their election to county lines and sectional
interests, but the Governor was elected by the whole people to rep-
resent the general interests of the state, to represent the sovereignty
of her power, and to administer the government for the general
welfare.

440 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Here were two representative powers, each drawing their power
from the people, set up to check each other. It was a mistaken
view of our system of government that the Legislature is the sole
representative of the people; the Governor was also their represent-
ative. He could see no danger in giving the Governor the power
to watch over the actions of the Legislature, and to guard the
interests of the state from the corruption which might obtain ascend-
ency in that department. Gentlemen have undertaken to argue
that the veto power is a restriction upon the people and in its effect
it is anti-republican. He had never considered it in that light
nor had the people themselves, for we have all seen, as it has been
truly said, that every exercise of it in the national government
has been prudent, wise and good for the common welfare. From
the time when Washington and Madison exercised this power
down to the present time, the people have sustained them;
although there may be difference of opinion on some of them, and
he himself might, upon one of them entertain different views than
those entertained by the President, still the exercise of the former
and the principle on which it was based had universally been sus-
tained. When the responsibility of the act rests upon a single
individual, so long will the people have no cause to complain of its
exercise.

He would vote for the three-fifths, as proposed by the gentleman
from Schuyler, because he had now no opportunity of voting for
the two-thirds which had been stricken out. But when the section
came before the Convention, he would vote for its adoption as
reported by the committee on the Executive Department. He
would also vote to reconsider the vote by which that number had
been stricken out. He hoped that vote would be reconsidered and
"two-thirds" replaced in the section.

Mr. MINSHALL replied at some length to the argument of the
gendeman from Greene (Mr. Woodson) and urged that the remarks
of that gendeman and the authorities cited by him had shown
that there was more necessity for the constitutional veto to be vested
in the Governor of a state than in the President of the United States.
The great and iniquitous evils of unrestricted, wild and ruinous
local legislation, did not exist to such a dangerous extent in the na-
tional legislature as in the states.

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 441

He pursued the subject for some considerable time.

Mr. SCATES addressed the committee in favor of the veto power,
and in advocacy of the "two-thirds" proposal.

Mr. HAYES said, that he had no desire to prolong the discussion
but before the question was taken he wished to say a few words
upon this subject. He was one who believed that the rights and inter
ests of the people were as much represented in the person of the
Governor of this state, as in the Legislature, or in this body. This
is the ground he had ever taken on this question and upon all others,
and he had seen no resaon to abandon it. He differed from the
gentleman who had denounced this veto power with so much warmth;
he could not see in it the horrid spectre of monarchial misrule, nor
see the iron rule of despotism, nor one man ruling with an iron
hand over the rights, liberties and destinies of the people. He could
see nothing of this kind as the result of the veto power. It was true
that if you took away the right of government and gave it to one
man to the exclusion of all others — it would be tyranny; if you
gave to one man all power, and allowed no appeal, he admitted
that that would be tyranny; or if you gave to him the sole power
of enacting laws, this would be tyranny. But he did not think that
this power of a constitutional qualified veto was any more than a
temporary restriction upon legislation; the Governor who exer-
cises it neither enacts nor defeats a law, his veto merely postpones
its passage, and delays for a while the action of the Legislature.
The Legislature meets here and passes an act which the Governor
does not, looking at it in no sectional nor local point of view, think
should become a law; he vetoes it, and the subject goes back to
the Legislature and from them, if it fails to be passed again, to the
people and they decide upon it at the next election. In such a
case there is an issue between the executive and the legislative
departments, but where is it tried? If the Governor had the sole
power of deciding that issue then that power might become tyranny;
but it is not so, he has not the decision of the question, it goes
back to the source whence both parties derive their power — the
people. He could see no danger in a power so conservative as this.

He had heard since he had been here the greatest outcries against
past legislatures; he had heard them denounced as wanting in
integrity and regard for the people's interests; they had been

442 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

termed nuisances, and yet he was astonished, greatly surprised,
to hear the same men who had been loudest in their denunciations,
object to the most wholesome restriction upon the actions of such
bodies. He wished not to introduce any party feeling or party
spirit into this discussion, or upon any question which might come
before the Convention, he had avoided it heretofore and would
for the future; but the gentleman from Clinton (Mr. Bond) had
said the adoption of the veto power, and the vesting of it in the
Governor presupposed that officer to be no ninny. Now, he
knew not the sense in which the gentleman intended to be under-
stood, when he made that remark, but forone, he, (Mr. H.) would
say, that as far as the present Governor of Illinois was concerned,
it would not be applicable, if intended as a sneer; nor did he, so
far as his acquaintance extended, [know] of any other person who
had occupied that post, who was not fully competent to perform
its duties.

Mr. BOND disclaimed any intention in what he had said, of
reflecting upon the present Governor of the state, of whom he had a
high opinion.

Mr. HAYES said, that he would say no more upon the subject,
he had attained his object, which was to draw forth from the gentle-
man the disclaimer he had just made. In conclus on he hoped that
the "majority" would not be adopted as it rendered the veto of
litde avail; but hoped that the amendment, " three-fifths, " would
succeed.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell expressed himself in favor of the " three-
fifths, " as a concession.

And the question being taken on inserting "three-fifths," it was
decided in the affirmative — yeas, 85, nays, not counted.

Mr. BROCKMAN moved the committee rise; and the committee
rose and asked leave to sit again. Granted.

And the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole-
Mr. Crain in the chair — and took up section 21.

Sec. 21. The Governor shall nominate and, by and with the
advice of the Senate, appoint a Secretary of State, who shall keep

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 443

a fair register of the official acts of the Governor, and, when re-
quired, shall lay the same and all papers, minutes, and vouchers
relative thereto, before either branch of the General Assembly;
and shall perform such other duties as shall be assigned him by law.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out "shall be appointed by the
Governor."

Mr. JONES moved to strike out the whole section.

Messrs. Thomas, Vance, Lockwood, Kitchell, and Peters,
advocated the adoption of the section in the shape as reported;
they thought that the Secretary of State was the confidential and
constitutional adviser of the Governor, and that it was of the utmost
importance that he be a friend of and chosen by the Governor.
Many cases were daily occurring where the necessity of this was
fully demonstrated. They also argued that the act of election
implied representation, and asked what interest was represented by
the Secretary of State. They considered the office of no sort of
interest to the people, and that it was only of importance to the
Governor, who would often have occasion to consult and deliberate
with him upon points of constitutional law, which, perhaps, that
Governor might not be familiar with.

Messrs. Gregg and Loudon advocated the motion to strike
out, and a provision to be inserted that the Secretary of State
should be elected by the people. They repelled the argument that
this officer was the constitutional and legal adviser of the Governor,
by urging that that function was properly belonging to the Attorney
General. They contended that the people were as competent and
as likely to select a proper and suitable person to fill that office as
they were any other in the government.

The question was then taken on the motion of Mr. Hogue, and
was lost.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to insert, after the words "Secretary
of State : " "whose term of office shall expire with the office of Gov-
ernor, by whom he shall have been nominated, and to hold the office
till his successor is appointed and qualified."

And the vote thereon resulted — yeas 51, nays 50; no quorum
voting.

Mr. THOMAS opposed the amendment as insufficient and in-
explicit and hoped it would be voted down, in order to have one,

444 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

drawn with great care by the chairman of the committee, presented
for their adoption.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, opposition to sonie propositions was
often made in consequence of the source whence they came. The
amendment he had presented, which had been opposed as insufficient
was the one which had been drawn with great care by the chairman
of the committee, who had requested him to offer it. He would
not press it, but would withdraw it.

Mr. DAWSON moved to strike out "the" at the beginning
of section, and insert "each." — Adopted.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to add to the section: "and
shall receive as his compensation ?6oo per annum. " Rejected —
yeas 38.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL moved to insert: "whose salary shall be
$1000 per annum;" which was rejected.

Mr. MARSHALL of Mason moved to insert: "who shall hold
his office for the same time as Governor, and receive |8oo per
annum."

Mr. LOGAN offered, as a substitute, the amendment withdrawn
by Mr. Constable; which was adopted.

Mr. KENNER moved to make the salary ^700 per annum;
which was rejected. Several amendments of small importance were
offered and almost unanimously rejected. The question was taken
on striking out, and decided in the negative — yeas 48, nays 69.

Mr. SIBLEY moved, that the salary be ?8oo per annum.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery offered, as amendment, " that the
Governor shall have power to remove the Secretary from office,
when, in his opinion, the public interests require it;" which was
adopted, and then the amendment of Mr. S. was carried.

Sections 22 and 23, the last of the report, were adopted, after
slight amendments.

Mr. MARKLEY 'called up his motion to reconsider the vote by
which the 4th section had been amended, so as to require a citizen-
ship of fourteen years to be elected Governor, and the committee
refused to reconsider— yeas 48, nays not counted.

The 5th section, which had been passed over informally, was
taken up, and the question pending was the substitute therefor, as
amended.

SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847 445

Mr. LOGAN moved to strike out "and shall act as fund com-
missioner." Carried. And then the substitute was adopted.

On motion, the committee rose and reported back the article
in relation to the Executive Department; which was laid on the
table, and 200 copies ordered to be printed as amended. And then,
on motion the Convention adjourned.

XXXIII. MONDAY, JULY 19, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Hale.

Mr. ROBBINS presented a petition from citizens of Randolph
county, praying that some provision may be adopted, exempting a
homestead from execution. Referred to the committee on Law
Reform.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall, by leave, offered a resolution that
this convention adjourn on Saturday next, to meet again on the
1st Monday of November next, and after some remarks, the same
was rejected. Yeas 13.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac, from the committee on Elections, and
the right of suffrage, made a report, which was read, laid on the table,
and 200 copies ordered to be printed.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to suspend the rules to take up a resolution
offered by him some days ago, providing that this Convention
adjourn sine die on the 31st inst. After a short debate, the motion
to suspend the rules was rejected. Yeas 62, nays 82.

Mr. BROWN rose and moved that the rules be suspended to
enable him to present a preamble and some resolutions. He said
that he had received a letter from Alton, which informed him that
the remains of Lieutenants Fletcher, Robbins, and Ferguson,
who had gallantly fought, and gloriously fallen in the service of their
country, had arrived at that place, and would be interred on Wed-
nesday. He had been requested to extend an invitation to the
Convention to attend the funeral ceremonies, but he was aware
that some time had already been lost by the visit for a similar
purpose to Jacksonville, and that there were many in the Conven-
tion who regretted the time thus lost, thinking that the Convention
might have appointed a committee to represent them at that cele-
bration, and as the time which it would occupy to go to Alton would
be much greater than that to Jacksonville, in consequence of the
difference in the distance, he had therefore prepared the following
preamble and resolutions:

The following letter was then read:
446

MONDAY, JULY 19, 1847 447

Alton, July i6th, 1847.
Geo. T. Brown, esq.,

Dear Sir: - I am requested by my fellow citizens, to ask you,
as Mayor of the city of Alton, to extend to the members of the con-
stitutional Convention of Illinois, an invitation to participate with
them on Wednesday next, (the 21st inst.,) at 1 p. m., in the cere-
monies attendant upon the burial of the remains of our brave
Lieutenants, Fletcher, Ferguson and Robbins, of the Alton
Guards, 2d Regiment Illinois Volunteers, who fell upon the battle
field of Buena Vista, nobly sustaining the honor of their state and
country.

I am with respect.

Your obedient servant,

E. Keating, Chief Marshal.

The rules were unanimously suspended and Mr. Brown pre-
sented the following, which were unanimously adopted:

Whereas, This Convention has just been informed that the
bodies of Lieutenants Edward F. Fletcher, Lauriston Robbins
and Rodney Ferguson, of the "Alton Guards," second regiment
Illinois volunteers, who fell upon the bloody field of Buena
Vista, while nobly sustaining the honor of their country, have reached
Alton, and that they will be interred in that city on Wednesday, the
2ist inst., with funeral honors; and whereas, this Convention, be-
lieving that it is right and proper for them to commemorate the
noble and patriotic deeds and virtues of those who have so gloriously
fallen in the service of their country; be it therefore

Resolved, That this Convention deeply sympathize with the
families and friends of the lamented Fletcher, Robbins and Fer-
guson, who have been so suddenly cut down in the vigor of youth,
and whose noble deeds on the bloody field of Buena Vista have en-
shrined their memories in the affections of the nation and placed their
names on the page of its history.

Resolved, That this Convention, for the purpose of honoring
the lamented dead, will join in the celebration of their funeral
ceremonies.

Resolved, That a committee of nine be appointed to represent
this Convention in the funeral ceremonies aforesaid.

448 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Resolved, That copies of the foregoing preamble and resolutions,
signed by the President and Secretary, be transmitted by the
Secretary to the families of the deceased Fletcher, Robbins and
Ferguson.

Messrs. Brown, Singleton, Smith of Gallatin, Constable,
Pratt, Woodson, McCallen, Colby and Hogue, were appointed
the committee under the above resolutions, to represent the Con-
vention at the funeral ceremonies.

Mr. WEAD moved that the Convention resolve itself into
committee of the whole, to take up the report of the committee on
the Judiciary Department, and the Convention resolved itself into
committee of the whole. Mr. Scates in the chair. After some
discussion as to the proper mode of proceeding with the three
reports, the committee took up the first section of the majority
report:

Sec. I. The judicial power of this State, shall be vested in
one supreme court, in circuit courts, and such inferior courts
as the legislature shall, from time to time ordain and establish.

Mr. LOGAN moved to insert in the section "county courts."

Mr. JENKINS moved to strike out all after "circuit courts"
and insert "and such other courts as may be established by this
constitution."

Mr. LOGAN accepted this amendment to be added to his.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean was opposed to leaving with the Legis-
lature the power to establish innumerable municipal courts
throughout the State, as would be the case if the section were to
remain in its present shape, and advocated the adoption of the
amendment of Mr. Jenkins, which, while it established the princi-
ple and system of our judiciary it allowed the Legislature to create
as many circuit courts as the necessities of population and interests
of the people demanded.

Mr. HARVEY did not agree with the gentlemen in fixing the
number of the courts in the constitution. It was impossible at the
present time to foresee what the interests and population of the
state hereafter would require; and was opposed to tying the hands
of the legislature from establishing such courts, with such powers
and jurisdiction as may be required by those interests and the
increase of population.

MONDAY, JULY 19, 1847 449

Mr. FARWELL was opposed to the amendment of the gen-
tleman from Jackson. He thought it out of the question and did
not think that any one here believed that this Convention could
adopt any system that would be perfect in all its details, and
could see no propriety in our tying the hands of the Legislature
from altering or changing or adopting that system to meet the great
growing interests and wants of the people. A supreme court was
necessary under all circumstances, and so were circuit courts, and
it was well to provide that they should be established, but he did
not think that the number of circuit courts should be unalterably
fixed. It was indispensable that these two courts should be
provided for in the constitution; but not so with the inferior or
minor courts. He was opposed to any constitutional provision
defining the number and character of all the courts that may be
required by the changes of society, and of the business and inter-
ests of the people. The smaller and inferior tribunals of the state
aflfected to the greatest extent the interests of society, and the
Legislature should be left full power to establish such courts, or
to change and alter their power and jurisdiction to meet the
changes that were daily taking place in the business and feelings
of the people. We might be able to adopt a system that would
suit the interests and population of the state at the present time;
but it was impossible for us to adopt any system that would suit
ten years hereafter.

Mr. SINGLETON advocated the adoption of the amendment
of the gentleman from Jackson. He was in favor of fixing in the
constitution a system of our judiciary department, and the char-
acter and jurisdiction of the courts, but would leave with the
Legislature a power to increase the number of the circuit courts to
meet the exigencies of the increased population of the state.

Mr. PETERS said, he approached this subject with some trem-
ulousness; he had looked forward to the day when the report of
the Judiciary committee would come before them for discussion,
with fear and trembling. The judiciary was the most important
department of the government. While it was the most important
and powerful in its influence and effect upon the rights, property
and liberties of individuals, it was the least powerful in defending
itself from the encroachments of the other branches of the govern-

450 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ment and from the opposition of popular excitement; it was the
least powerful of any branch of the government when attacked by
the Legislature or the popular clamor. And it was our duty, in
justice to its importance and the want of power, to defend itself,
to fix in the constitution a provision that will place the higher
courts above the power and influence and control of the Legisla-
ture. The history of the judiciary throughout the country shows,
that in no single state has it escaped from the eflFects of a feverish
excitement against the higher judicial tribunals, which in many
instances had forced them to submit to popular clamor and legis-
lative control. This fact was known to all, and he called upon
gentlemen to place at least the highest courts of the state above
all these influences, and then the people, in case the inferior tri-
bunals of the country do them injustice, will always have one
tribunal to protect their rights, property and liberties, and one
conservative power on which they can depend. If these higher
tribunals be thus elevated above all influences, we might leave
with safety, to the Legislature, a power to regulate the inferior
courts to conform to the interests, and, if you pleased, to the wishes
of the people. He was opposed to granting the Legislature the
power to increase the number of the circuit courts of the state. If
there was danger in allowing that department power to establish
inferior courts how much more was the danger in giving them the
power to fritter away the power of the circuit courts by increasing
their number to as many as there are counties in the state.
Mr. P. read a proposition which he had drawn up — which gave
the Legislature power to create, establish and destroy the inferior
courts — at the will and desire of the people, and secured the higher
and superior courts from any change by legislative action.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery was in favor of the amendment.
He thought we should establish in the constitution the system and
jursidiction of our judiciary, and leave with the Legislature no
power but to increase the number of circuit courts.

Messrs. MINSHALL and KINNEY of Bureau were in favor
of the section as it was reported by the committee.

Mr. GREGG said, that in the amendment he saw one objec-
tion to it which he desired to point out to the Convention. If it
should be adopted it would prohibit the creation of any municipal

MONDAY, JULY 19, 1847 451

courts in the cities; and in his opinion the time would come when
such courts would be absolutely necessary in our cities. In the
city of Chicago, which was Increasing so rapidly, the time would
soon come, if it had not already arrived, when such a court —
independently of the county courts — would be necessary to pre-
serve order and obedience to the laws. He thought that the
Convention should take this matter into consideration, and hoped
that some provision would be made either by an amendment to the
amendment, or by a rejection of it, and thus leave the subject
open for legislative action. Let the Legislature, when the time
shall come, that the population will require it, establish such
courts in Chicago, Peoria, Alton and Galena.

Mr. LOGAN said, to meet the views of the gentleman, he
would modify his amendment by adding to it: "Provided, that
the Legislature may establish in cities having a population over

thousand, such tribunals] as may be necessary, having police

jurisdiction in cases less than felony."

Mr. SHERMAN expressed similar views to those of his col-
league, Mr. Gregg.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess, was of opinion that, although
the amendment of the gentleman from Sangamon went further
than it did before the modification of it, still it did not go far
enough. The section even as amended placed an absolute restric-
tion upon the Legislature, from providing such tribunals as the
people may hereafter require, when the interests and population
of the state shall be increased. He agreed with the member who
had said that we are restricting too much, carrying our restrictions
too far, and should be careful that we did not earn for our con-
stitution the soubriquet of a constitution of restrictions. This
was not proper. We should not follow this course. We should
allow something for future legislation. If we pursued the course
of restriction that seemed such a favorite course with gentlemen,
where will it lead us? It will, if carried out, lead us to forge
chains of iron to be placed upon the members of the General As-
sembly whenever they meet, to prevent them rushing, the moment
they arrive here, into the treasury and robbing it. There had
been something said respecting a court which had been established
in Alton and then abolished, of that he knew nothing; but he

452 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

would refer them to the tribunals that had been established at
Chicago and Galena, which the actual necessity of their creation
compelled the Legislature to establish. Before they were estab-
lished it was often eighteen months before the people could obtain
a judgment on a suit, and we had to resort to the United States
district court, our dockets were crowded, our jails were full, justice
was delayed and men were denied a speedy trial, a right secured
to them by the constitution of the United States. The people,
unable to remain thus, came to the Legislature, and had these tri-
bunals created to meet the exigencies, under that provision of the
constitution which it is proposed by these amendments to have
stricken out. This was the same case in Galena; necessity com-
pelled her to have these courts established there, which if no power
had been given to the Legislature to create, we would have had to
wait till the constitution had been changed. And now, are they
to be taken away from us. Look at St. Louis. There they have
their circuit and city courts, a court of common pleas, their
recorder's and a criminal court, all springing up as the city grew in
interest and population, and established as the exigencies of the
people required them. No complaint was ever heard against
them; no complaint that they had abused their powers. Look
at Chicago and see what she will be some years hence; look at her
fast increasing population, commerce and business interests of
every kind: here too is Galena stretching her Biarean arms over
her hills, and reaching far up her vallies [sic], fast rising into im-
portance, and interest, and will you tell them these courts, specified
in this section, are sufficient for the administration of your present
judicial affairs, and the constitution shall deny you for all time to
come, any change or increase, no matter how large in population
or influential in trade and commerce you may hereafter become.
He would desire to say more upon this subject, but his health would
not at this moment permit him, as it was with difficulty he had
spoken at all.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean replied to the gentleman from Cook
and Jo Daviess. He said the necessity of the courts they had
spoken of was the result of a want of the provision now proposed,
in|the old constitution. In 1840 the Legislature abolished the
circuit court system and compelled the supreme court to do circuit

MONDAY, JULY 19, 1847 453

duty. These judges were unable to perform the laborious tasks
assigned them and the business was undisposed of. Then arose
the necessity of these smaller courts. But under the present
section the number of circuit courts may be increased and Chicago
and Galena can have each a circuit court to itself. This in his
opinion obviated the difficulty urged by the gentleman.

The question was divided and first taken on the provision
offered by Mr. Logan, and it was rejected — then on striking out,
and decided in the affirmative; then on inserting "county courts,"
which was carried; and then adding the amendment of Mr.
Jenkins, which was also carried.

Mr. CHURCH moved to insert after 'county courts," — "and
probate courts."

On motion, the committee rose and the Convention adjourned
till 3 P. M.

AFTERNOON

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole
and resumed the consideration of the report of the Judiciary com-
mittee. The question pending was on the motion to insert
"probate courts;" and being taken, resulted — yeas 29, nays 42 —
no quorum voting.

Mr. HENDERSON suggested that the committee had ex-
pressed their intention to give the circuit courts probate juris-
diction, and therefore, it was unnecessary to insert this amendment.

And the question being taken again resulted — yeas 31, nays
64 — no quorum voting.

The committee rose and reported that fact to the Convention,
and a call was ordered; after some time spent in the call a quorum
appeared, and the committee resumed its sitting.

And the question being taken on the amendment, it was
rejected.

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, moved to strike out the section and
insert "The judicial power of this state shall be vested in one
supreme court, in circuit courts, in justices of the peace, and in
such other courts as the Legislature may, from time to time,
establish."

And the question being taken thereon, it was rejected — yeas 49,
nays 64.

454 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sec. 1. The supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction
only, except in cases relating to the revenue; and power to issue
writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, in-
formations, in the nature of writs of quo warranto and certiorari,
and to hear and to determine the same, and in such cases of im-
peachment as may be required to be tried before it.

Mr. ARCHER moved to strike out all after the word "same."
He said that in the last report which we had acted upon we had
provided for trial of impeachments by the Senate which was the
more appropriate tribunal. Cases of impeachment were generally
for political offenses, and it might occur that after impeachment
it would be found proper to have the individual tried before a court,
and it would not be proper to have him tried by judges who had,
when impeaching him, made up an opinion of his guilt.

The question was taken and decided in the negative.

Mr. HURLBUT moved to strike out "except in cases relating
to the revenue." Lost.

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out" prohibitions, quo warranto,
informations in the nature of suits of quo warranto and certiorari,"
and insert "and all other writs necessary to the rightful exercise
of appellate jurisdiction."

Mr. HARVEY moved to strike out of the amendment the
word "appellate." Carried, and then the amendment was
adopted— yeas 64, nays 47.

Sec. 3. The supreme court shall consist of one chief justice
and two associate justices, who shall be not less than thirty-five
years of age, and shall receive a salary of twelve hundred dollars
per annum each, and no more, payable quarterly.

Mr. DALE moved to strike out "two associate justices" and
insert "three" &c. Mr. D. said that as to the number which
should compose this court, he had not given much consideration;
the number "three" did not appear to him a proper number. If
the main duty of the supreme court was the determination of cases
of appeals, and this determination to be final, the necessity ap-
peared of fixing the number of judges with a view to this end, to en-
sure proper determinations and which would be satisfactory to the
people. Would determinations made by this court, composed of
three judges only, be always satisfactory? If, in a case of appeal.

MONDAY, JULY 19, 1847 455

two of these supreme judges favored the reversal of a judgment
and the third the affirmance of it, the judgment would be reversed;
and yet it would be but the opinion of two judges opposed to two.
These two supreme judges, overruling not a smaller number of
judges nor of less capacity, but an equal number, a supreme judge
and a circuit judge, and the latter two probably the more compe-
tent men. The opinion of the circuit judge was entitled to con-
sideration. This judge would oftentimes be a more able one than
the supreme judge. For the latter would be nominated by con-
ventions, which, desirous of presenting familiar names to the
voters, would select from among men well known, but known, it
might be, chiefly as politicians; whilst the circuit judge would be
selected by a small district, by those personally acquainted with
him, and would be chosen on account of his legal acquirements,
known to every one in the district, and acquired, it might be,
whilst the nominees for the supreme court were employed in
politics and legislation. Would the people be satisfied with the
determination of their cases made by two associate justices over-
ruling the opinions of the president judge, and circuit judge, when
the latter two might be considered the abler men and possessed of
more legal knowledge? Would not four, then, be a better number
for the supreme bench, so that there might be a concurrence of
opinion of at least three judges in all final decisions and this being
a majority of all giving opinions in the case, supreme judges and
circuit judge, would it not be more satisfactory?

Messrs. Harvey, Lockwood and Peters supported the
amendment; Messrs. Davis, of Montgomery, Davis, of McLean,
KiTCHELL, and Wead opposed it, and the question being taken
thereon, it was decided in the negative.

Mr. KITCHELL moved to strike out "^1200" and insert
"I1500." Yeas 49, nays 65.

Mr. KITCHELL moved to amend by adding "Provided, that
the general assembly may, whenever it shall become necessary,
provide for additional associate justices, not exceeding two others,
to be appointed as provided for in this constitution;" which was
rejected.

Mr. HAYES moved to strike out "who shall not be less than
thirty-five years of age," and the committee refused.

4S6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. WITT moved to insert after "age," "and who shall have
been a citizen of the United States for five years;" which was
adopted.

Mr. WEAD moved to strike out the section and insert "the
supreme court shall consist of three judges, any two of whom shall
form a quorum; and the concurrence of two of said judges shall, in
all cases, be necessary to a decision," and the same was rejected.

Sec. 4. The justices of the supreme court shall be elected
by the qualified voters of the state, on the first Monday of March
after the adoption of this article; returns whereof shall be made to
the Secretary of state, who shall count the same in the presence of
the Governor and Auditor, or either of them; the three persons
having the highest number of votes shall be elected.

Mr. SERVANT moved to strike out "elected by the qualified
voters of the state on the first Monday in March after the adoption
of this article," and insert "appointed by the Governor, by and
with the advice and consent of the senate." He said that he
knew his amendment would not be adopted, but he desired that
his constituents should know that he had acted according to his
sentiments. If he thought he could carry the amendment he
would speak for a month and log roll with every member of the
Convention; but he knew differently and would do no more than
propose the amendment.

Mr. PETERS addressed the Convention till a late hour in
support of the amendment, and without concluding, gave way to a
motion that the committee rise.

The committee rose, and then the Convention adjourned until

8 A. M.

XXXIV. TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Green of Tazewell.

Messrs. Kinney, of St. Clair, Wead, and Cross, of Winnebago,
presented petitions praying the appointment of a superintendent
of schools; referred to committee on Education.

Mr. ROBBINS presented the following resolution, which was
adopted :

Resolved, That the committee on Finance inquire into the
expediency of inserting in the constitution an article, requiring
the Legislature to ascertain from time to time the amount of the
state debt — to apportion the state debt, according to the taxable
property assessed in the state. To provide by law that any indi-
vidual may pay his share of the said debt proportioned to his
taxable property, and that such real estate as shall have paid its
share of state indebtedness, and the value of so much personal
estate as shall have been paid its share of state indebtedness, shall
be ever thereafter exonerated from any liability in consequence
of the state debt, and to provide from moneys raised by such
voluntary payments, a sinking fund, with which to purchase the
state indebtedness.

Mr. KNAPP, of Jersey, by leave, presented the following
resolution, which was adopted:

Whereas, A respectable minister of the Gospel, whilst attending
the Convention to open its sessions by prayer, under a resolution
of this Convention has been grossly insulted and menaced with
bodily injury by a member of the Convention; and whereas, it is
alike due to the Convention and to the ministers, that we should
not invite them to perform that duty unless we could secure them
against such indignities; therefore

Resolved, That the resolution inviting the clergymen of Spring-
field to open the sessions of the Convention with prayer be re-
scinded, and that the secretary inform the said clergymen of the
same, with the assurance of the Convention, that this step is not
adopted from any dissatisfaction with the manner in which they
457

458 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

have discharged their sacred duty, but solely from an unwilling-
ness to subject them to a repetition of such indignities.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the
whole — Mr. Scates in chair.

Mr. PETERS said, that the question now before them was one
of greater interest to him than any other which would come before
them; and it was this reason that had induced him to detain the
Convention much longer than under other circumstances he
would have done. He had prepared a proposition to amend the
section, and would have offered it had he not been anticipated by
the motion of the gentleman from Randolph. He would have it
read: (the secretary read the proposition.) Mr. P. said, that the
proposition just read was not the one which he preferred most, but
it was one which would secure the independence of the judiciary,
and with the independence of the judiciary, the rights and liberties
of the people. He had argued yesterday, and would to-day, that
on the independence of the judiciary of the government, rested
the liberties of the people. When that department was placed in
such circumstances — exposed to all the dangers of a change by
legislative action or the popular clamor — it was easily induced to
swerve from the path of rectitude, and its purity endangered by
becoming dependent upon them for support. The great safe-
guard of all liberty was gone when the judiciary became depend-
ent. He alluded to the history of the judiciary in England, and
said, the time was when it was the prerogative of the crown to
make and unmake judges — to command them — to rule by the
terror of power their decisions, and make them the instruments
of tyranny; but the time came when the monarch was forced to
abandon this part of his prerogative, and give up the right of
removal of judges from office, except on the address of his gentle-
men in the commons. Prior to that time they were the creatures
of the crown, and bound to its behests; since then, and ever after
the revolution of 1680, we find them independent, and as firm
as adamant in opposition to the tyrannical encroachments of the
kingly power. In the Swiss cantons the independence of the
judiciary was most safely guarded; the people there fear so much
that their judges will be influenced by the party appointing
them that they, when they have to appoint a judge, send to other

TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1847 459

cantons for a suitable person to fill the office, in order that he may
come among them free from all influence upon his actions by a
feeling for the persons selecting him. In Spain, too, he found an
instance of an independent judiciary. At one time the whole
power of the government was in the hands of great lords behind
the throne, who ruled and governed the officers of state, and held
dominion over the administration of the laws. The people were
never safe under such a rule. A change came, the judges were
made independent of all parties, and removed from the influence
of the lords, and public safety was secure. He could not illustrate
the beauty of an independent judiciary and of the great confidence
it created in the minds of the people, better than by relating an
anecdote told of the great monarch Frederick. He was once
riding outside Berlin, when he met a boy carrying fruit; he asked
the boy to give him some of the fruit. The boy replied, "I cannot,
I am carrying it to my mother." "I will buy it of you." "No,
I cannot sell it, I must carry it to my mother." "I will ''tell the
king that you refused it to me for money." "I cannot help it,
I will not sell it." "Then," said the monarch, "I am the king,
and will make you give up the fruit." "I don't care if you are
the king," said the boy; "if you take it from me, there are judges
in Berlin!" This, sir, was the greatest boast of that monarch,
that his people could exclaim, "we have judges in Berlin." He
thought the experience of the past had shown that the old
mode of selecting the judiciary was safe, and had worked well,
and he deprecated any departure from it, to enter into the un-
known paths of this untrodden system, with no lights of experience
to guide our footsteps. The greatest man who had ever distin-
guished the tribunals of the country, had said, when an attempt
was made to overturn the judiciary system of Virginia, that on
the independence of the judiciary, and its removal from all in-
fluences, depended the liberties of the people. Mr. P. here read
an extract from the remarks of judge Marshall in the Virginia
convention. He would refer also to another Virginian, Mr.
Jefferson, who had said repeatedly that we should have our judi-
ciary independent and far removed above all influences and biases;
and that, if this were so, no matter how corrupt the legislative or
the executive departments might become, the people would always

460 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

have one safeguard, and an invulnerable protection from their
dangerous action. Mr. P. thought that an elective judiciary
could not secure to us an independent judiciary. Judge Marshall
has said: "would you place on the jury a man who was interested
in or to be opposed by the result of the verdict?" And Mr. P.
asked, would you trust a man on your bench whose very office,
whose salary, whose means of living, and the very bread for his
wife and family, may depend on the decisions he will make —
when he, if he oflFend that power or that party which put him in
office, knows and feels he will be by them put out again? Will
any man, can any man, say that such a system will secure an
independent judiciary? He had as high an opinion of the general
intelligence of the people as any man, but he would not flatter
the people by attributing to them qualifications which they did
not as a body possess, nor which they would claim. He was
not disposed to say that the masses of the people were all compe-
tent judges of a man's capacity as an expounder of one of the most
abstruse sciences. He was not ready to admit that they were
all competent to judge whether a man whom they never saw, had
read a sufficient number of books upon law — whether he had the
mind to understand what he had read — or was qualified with legal
knowledge sufficient to discharge the duties of a judge. And yet
a capacity to decide this question was an important requisite to be
possessed by one who was called upon to choose a judge. A man
presented himself to the people as a candidate for the professorship
of chemistry, would any one say that the masses of the people
were competent to decide whether that man understood the science
of chemistry, or qualified to teach it?

Mr. P. said, that although he might draw upon himself the
censure of the people and the press, he thought his position a cor-
rect one, and would follow it, even if he stood alone. He did not
think the people desired an elective judiciary — they wanted but
to take from the Legislature the power to elect them. Foreigners
were coming into our state, many who did not understand our
language; they, in six months, were permitted to vote, were they
qualified to judge of the abilities and learning of a man to fill the
office of a judge? They were good men, but not competent to
judge of a man's knowledge of abstruse science. We had re-

TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1847 461

stricted the Legislature, because we thought the people might
elect dishonest and corrupt men, and yet, they hesitate not, to
trust the people with the right to elect the judiciary; he put it to
the gentleman to answer this: dare they bind down the represent-
atives of the people, when there was no danger of the people's
doing wrong? How dare they tell the people they are incompetent
to select honest men to represent them in the Legislature, when
you open to them, the greater privilege, and recognize in them, the
capacity of judging of the qualifications of judges of law? He
reviewed, at great length, the history of the State of N. York;
alluded to the elective provision in the constitutions of Missouri
and Wisconsin which had been rejected. He alluded to many
abuses under the operation of the system in Mississippi. He
referred to the dangers of an elective judiciary in times of excite-
ment, asked where would be the independence of a judge elected
in Hancock county, during the Mormon excitement, and in the
same manner to the Massac difficulties.

He felt he had discharged his duty, and called upon the mem-
bers of the bar to stand up for the independence of the judiciary.
He thought he saw many evils in this system : the rich oppressing
the poor, the strong bearing down the weak, and the weak appeal-
ing to the judiciary in vain. He thought he saw the judge ranging
around the state, making friends by his official decisions of those
who would be powerful in re-electing him.

We have given but a skeleton of the remarks of Mr. P., who,
on both days, addressed the committee for four hours, eliciting the
closest attention.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean followed in a speech of one hour's
length in reply to the various positions assumed by the gentleman
from Peoria. He reviewed the whole argument, and contended
that the election of the judiciary was republican, and the most
effective in establishing it independent. He thought the expe-
rience of those states, in which it had been adopted, sufficiently
demonstrated its utility, and beneficial consequences. He advo-
cated its adoption as the only mode of ridding Illinois of her present
inefficient system which had none of the confidence of the people,
andjof establishing a system that would be entirely independent
of the other branches of the government, and would always receive

462 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the support and protection of the people.— He thought the objec-
tions urged against it were the probable abuses of the system, and
reminded the members that any system might be abused, and
that an abuse was not a fair argument. The right of suffrage
might and was often abused, but that was no argument against the
right of suffrage. Some men had wealth, and abused the power
it gave them, but that was no argument that it should be taken
from them. He would rather see judges the weather-cocks of
public sentiment, in preference to seeing them the instruments
of power, to see them registering the mandates of the Legislature,
and the edicts of the Governor.

He thought that even if the national judiciary were elected by
the people, they would have made better selections than had been
made by the President for years past. They would have chosen
judges, instead of broken down politicians.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell replied to the gentleman from
McLean, and advocated briefly the same views expressed by the
gentleman from Peoria.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin argued at much length on the
same grounds presented by Mr. Peters, against an elective
judiciary.

On motion, the committee rose and reported progress.

And the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention was called and, as soon as a quorum appeared,
resolved itself into committee of the whole, and resumed the con-
sideration of the report of the Judiciary committee.

Mr. ARCHER said, that he had listened to the remarks of the
gentleman from Peoria with great attention, but had not been
convinced by what he had heard, that the election of the judiciary
was not demanded by the people, or that it was fraught with
danger to the liberties of the state. After alluding to the benefits
resulting from its adoption — by placing it above the control of
the legislative or executive departments, and making it rest
entirely upon the people— the source of all power— for support
and confidence, he scouted any danger to be apprehended from
the change in the system.

TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1847 463

In New York they had made a change from the old system to
the elective principle, and it was done to meet the growing and
improving opinions of the people in regard to their judiciary. In
that state they had no cause to complain of their judiciary, it
stood high and elevated in the estimation of the people, its deci-
sions were authority all over the Union, and the people felt satisfied
with it, or at least they had no complaint to make. But a change
in the system was thought desirable by the Convention that met
to frame the constitution, and it was made and the people sus-
tained it by a triumphant majority. If a change was desirable
there, where there was no complaint, how much more so here,
where there was great complaint of the mode in which judges were
appointed.

He could not see how the dignity, independence, and standing
of the judiciary would be lessened by their election by the people,
instead of the Legislature, or the appointment by the Governor
and Senate.

He did not agree with those who argued that if they were
elected they would become the mere tools of the politicians to
whom they owed their elevation. Such would be the case when
a man felt that he owed the office he held to the Governor by whom
he was appointed, but not so with the man chosen by the whole
people. In the latter case he stood the choice of the people, to
no one man was he compelled to acknowledge his election, but
looked to them all as men whose interests he had been selected to
watch over, guard and protect.

He alluded at great length to the capacity of the people to
select competent judges to fill the bench of the supreme court, and
repelled the arguments of Messrs. Peters and Palmer, that they
were not as well qualified to elect the judges, as to elect a man to
appoint the judges.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey said, that this question had been dis-
cussed in the canvass in his county, and the people there had
expressed themselves in favor of an elective judiciary.

He referred the committee to the bill of rights where the
principle that all power is inherent in and of right belongs to
the people, and asked members why the people should not have
the right of choosing all the departments of the government; or

464 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

why should any two of the departments of the government assume
the right of creating the other, and of exercising over it a control.
After an allusion to the late change by the state of New York in
her judicial system, and an explanation of the anti-rent difficulties,
he referred the Convention to the period when the offices of con-
stable and justices of the peace were made elective. Then there
were the same cries made against the danger of political prejudices
and influences being brought to bear upon the administration of
justice. No where throughout the land could be found more
honest, upright, and impartial justices of the peace or inferior
magistracy, than in those states where they were elected by the
people. In time the superior courts would be found to be as pure —
as far removed from petty and political influences — -as was the
inferior. Moreover, he thought it a possible case, that the time
would come when the people would discover that it was not neces-
sary to have lawyers on the bench. It had been supposed that
none but lawyers should have been elected to this Convention to
frame a constitution, but in the election, the people had shown
that they thought differently. Farmers, merchants, and mechan-
ics, had been sent here, and they were not the least competent.
For one, he was not willing to give up every thing to lawyers.
There had been eulogies passed upon the profession, and it had been
said they were the most trusted and most abused persons in
society, but the lawyers had taken care not to tell us whether the
abuse or the trust was the most merited. He would vote against
the amendment.^"

Mr. KITCHELL was in favor of appointing the judges of the
supreme court by the Governor and senate; and of the election of
the circuit judges by the people. His views would be different
from those expressed by both sides. He thought the great objec-
tion on the part of the people to our present system was, that the
judges were elected by the Legislature; and then, another that
they held their office for life. The first prejudice against our
judiciary had arisen from a decision made by the supreme court
upon the question of the tenure by which the Secretary of State
held his office. The only manner in which the evil decisions of

"A longer account of this speech by Knapp may be found in the Sangamo
Journal, July 29.

TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1847 465

that court would be got over, was the increase of the bench, and
then there were made nine judges /or life. At last, to remedy this
evil, the present Convention was called, and the principal object
was to abolish the life system. The people were dissatisfied with
the mode of appointing the judges, in consequence of the great
loss of time by the Legislature in choosing the men, and in election-
eering for favorite candidates. He could see no necessity in
making the judges of the supreme court elective; that the
people had a right to elect them as well as any other officer, he did
not deny, but that such a thing was necessary he did deny. With
the circuit court it was different: the people knew all about the
candidates, as they were men continually on the circuit, and the
keen-eyed observation of the people would select the best men.
The people of Jo Daviess county knew nothing of a man who lived
in Wabash county. He alluded to this subject for some time, and
concluded by remarking that the object of the people in desiring
a change, was to strike at the circuit judges, and not to have the
supreme judges made elective.

Mr. WILLIAMS considered the question an important one,
and desired to state the grounds on which he would vote. He had
heard the arguments of the gentlemen from Peoria and Macoupin
against an elective judiciary, but had not been convinced. He
could appreciate the sincerity of their sentiments, because at one
time he was as prejudiced, by early associations and opinions, in
favor of the old system as they were. He had thrown off the
shackles which had bound his mind, and had come to a different
conclusion on the subject. We had seen the working of the old
system, and admired it — we had lived under it and saw no abuses —
we had witnessed and felt all of its operations, and had heard no com-
plaint. We were attached to it because it had worked well. But
that was ten years ago. At that time a man who was in favor of
an elective judiciary would be a curiosity. At that time, as had
been said, they made a decision, and that it was complained
of. But who made the complaint? If it had come from the
people, and they had stricken down the whole power of the court,
then there might be an argument against the elective principle.
But the complaint came from the Legislature, and the court was
dependent on the Legislature. Since then the system had not

466 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

worked well, and the people have desired a change, and have come
to the wise conclusion to elect the judiciary themselves, and relieve
it from any dependence on the other branches of the government.
Much had been said of an independent judiciary— independent of
whom? He agreed with all that had been said about the inde-
pendence of the judiciary; but one object of the judiciary was to
protect the people from the other branches of the government,
and how was this proposed to be carried out? The old system
was to place the judiciary independent of the people, and depend-
ent on the Governor and Legislature; the elective plan was to
make them independent of the Governor and Legislature, and
dependent on the people for support against the other branches of
the government. The object of the distribution of the powers of the
government was that the one department may check another. Sup-
pose you give a few men the power to make laws and carry them into
execution, it is simple and plain. Why not try that government?
Because those few men may become corrupt. Gentlemen say,
Let the Legislature and the Governor pass the laws, and before
those laws can go into effect, the judiciary must give them an
approval; therefore the judiciary has a control over the others.
But they say to the Governor and Legislature you may appoint
that judiciary yourself! Mr. W. was in favor of a limited term
of office by judges. He here viewed the English judiciary, and
replied to Mr. Peters on that subject. He opposed the election
of judges by general ticket as most objectionable, but any way
was better than appointment by the Governor, as good governors
always appointed good judges, and bad governors always bad
judges, and the experience of the late history of Illinois had shown
that the people thought second or third rate politicians men good
enough to fill that office.

Mr. LOGAN said, he would vote to strike out, but not to
insert what had been proposed by the amendment. He could not
vote for the election of judges by general ticket, but would vote for
the minority report— the election by districts— and he called on the
friends of both propositions of the elective system, to vote for
striking out; the question could then be taken on the two prop-
ositions. He urged upon all who were in favor of an election by
the^^people to vote to strike out.

TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1847 467

Mr. DAVIS of Massac hoped the motion to strike out would
prevail, he thought the general ticket system was the most objec-
tionable feature that could be proposed. Sooner than vote for
it he would vote for the nomination by the Governor and confir-
mation by the Senate.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery expressed a similar view.

Mr. HENDERSON moved the committee rise; which was
rejected.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess warned the friends of an
elective system to stand by the report of the committee as it stood,
for if this provision be stricken out, we cannot replace it. And
what would they then do? If stricken out they were precluded from
inserting it again.

Mr. LOGAN said, that when they got the measure into the
Convention and out of the committee it might be again inserted.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess: Why not report the section
as it is, and amend it after you get into the Convention.

Mr. moved that the committee rise, which was

rejected.

Mr. Z. CASEY appealed to the friends of an elective judiciary
to vote against striking out. He warned them not to part with
the section as it stood now. If the motion to strike out prevailed,
then they might give up all hopes of that system. He warned
them seriously to stand by the section.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess warned the friends of the
elective judiciary to maintain their ground. He assured them
that if it were stricken out, they would get no provision to elect
the judiciary inserted again.

A motion that the committee rise was made, and decided in
the negative.

Mr. HENDERSON said, that he had expected the movement
that had been made by the enemies of an elective judiciary. He
had been watching all day for the gentleman from Sangamon to
blow his trumpet, and gather his forces. He was not astonished
when that gentleman, after a careful glance at the vacant seats,
had sounded the note for action; it was in keeping with that
gentleman's superior tactics. He (Mr. H.) again warned the
members who were in favor of an elective judiciary to vote against

468 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

all propositions to strike out, for if the motion to strike out was
carried, the election of the judges by the people would be defeated.

And the question being taken on striking out, it was decided
in the affirmative. Yeas 8i, nays 31.

Mr. PETERS moved the committee rise; which was carried,
and the Convention adjourned till to-morrow at 8 a. m.

XXXV. WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1847

Prayer by Mr. Green, of Tazewell.

Leave of absence for ten days was granted to Messrs. Markley,
Loudon, Akin, and Dummer.

Mr. JENKINS, from the committee on Counties, reported
back sundry resolutions, and asked to be discharged from the
further consideration thereof.

On motion, the report and resolutions were laid on the table.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the
whole on the report of the Judiciary committee.

The motion pending was on inserting the amendment of Mr.
Servant — "be appointed by the Governor by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate."

Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, moved as a substitute for the amend-
ment—"the State shall be divided into three grand divisions as
nearly equal as may be, and the qualified voters of each division
shall elect one of said supreme judges for the term of six years."

Mr. BROCKMAN addressed the committee in opposition to
the amendment and in support of the election of the three judges
by general ticket.

Mr. FARWELL opposed the district system. It was, in his
opinion, worse than having the judges elected by the representa-
tives of the people. Under the district system a majority of the
court might be composed of two judges who were the choice of a
minority of the people. A man might be chosen by the people
of the southern or the northern districts who was obnoxious to the
whole people, and whose sentiments and opinions might be differ-
ent from those entertained by the majority of the people. Was this
an election by the people? It was not, but on the contrary placed
within the power of a minority to defeat the choice of the majority.
He warned gentlemen that in the north part of this State there
was a large party that was fast increasing in numbers and political
strength, they would soon be able to command an election in
that section. Did gentlemen desire to see those men — whose
principles were to do away with the law of the land, and adopt
469

470 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

what they called the law of God— filling, or selecting men pledged
to their views to fill the office of a judge of the supreme court?
The supreme court was a court not for any district but for the
whole state, and was intended to check the operations of the sec-
tional or circuit courts, and should be elected by the whole people.
Mr. DAVIS, of Massac, said that he hoped the amendment
proposed by him would pass. If it does not, he thought he could
see a dark and impenetrable gloom overhanging the future destinies
of this state. He thought if the general ticket system prevailed,
we would see in the future men elected to the supreme court for
no other reason than that of party influence and political bias.
When such would be the case, then would the sheet anchor of
liberty be forever gone. He thought there was no plan more
fraught with danger to the liberties of the people, than the general
ticket system. Gentlemen have said that we should have these
judges elected by the whole people, heretofore they have been
elected by the representatives of the people, and is there a system
more universally condemned than the present judicial system of
Illinois? Who are the judges of this court? They are but men,
with all the frailties and weaknesses of human nature — nothing
more than mere human beings — and will be influenced and biased
by considerations of gratitude and feeling towards the party
electing them; they would feel coerced into a support of the prin-
ciples of that party to which they owe their election. By choosing
the judges from these three grand divisions the conflicting interests
of the several parts of the state are represented on the supreme
bench of the state, and no one political sentiment or interest is
exclusively followed by that tribunal. If the judges were to be
elected by general ticket, the whole south would be swallowed up
by the vortex of the north, and he called upon them to elect the
judges by districts, and thus secure a judge from the south. He
deprecated the general ticket system, as it would lead to party
conventions and caucuses, and the eliciting by them of pledges
from their nominees to decide upon certain questions in a par-
ticular way, for he concluded that the candidates of these con-
ventions would inevitably be chosen. He had seen the workings
of such systems. He had known the pledge made by, and required
from candidates for judgeships. He had known men [to] receive the

WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1847 471

appointment of a judgeship upon a pledge to appoint a particular
individual clerk of his court. It was to break up and avoid all
this, that he advocated the election by districts. He feared
nothing from the growth of the abolition party, or that one from
that party might be appointed a judge. On the subject of the
judiciary he knew no party feeling — recognized no party lines.
He knew no party when called upon to act upon a principle which
was for the benefit or prejudice of the state. He knew no party
when called upon to act upon the judiciary — upon the selection of
men to expound the law. He opposed the general ticket system
because he feared a court made up on party grounds, and of men
whose judgments would be swayed by party considerations.
When such came to be the character of our judiciary, republican
institutions would crumble into dust, and freedom would shriek
her last.

Mr. GREGG said, that he could not see those great and alarm-
ing evils which had been predicted as involved in the general ticket
system. He did not think the supreme court as constituted for
the benefit or as the representative of the interest of any part of
the state, but as the supreme judicial tribunal of the whole state,
with jurisdiction over the whole territory and people of the state.
Why then consign to one section of the state the choice of a man to
administer justice in other parts of the state, and over people who
had no voice in his election ? Why not let the whole people, whose
rights, liberties, and property, are placed under his jurisdiction,
have a voice in his election? It is said that party interest and
feeljng will be introduced, and party excitement will enter into the
choice of the judges, if we elect them by general ticket. Will not
the same argument apply if elected by districts? Will not party
feeling be as rife? Will not party rancor and contention exist, or
be felt in those districts upon the subject? Will they have con-
ventions and caucuses, and all the modes of nominating party
candidates, as well as if they were elected by general ticket?
He could see no difference in that particular between the two sys-
tems. He deprecated party spirit as much as any one in judicial
matters; he agreed the ermine of justice should never be permitted
to be polluted or touched by the baleful influence of party spirit,
and sooner than see such take place, he would vote for the appoint-

472 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

merit of judges by the Governor and senate. It had been said
that the district system would produce a conflict of opinion and
a diversity of sentiment and interest upon the bench — and how
can this be produced? In no way except by the introduction of
party spirit into the election of the judges in the districts, and by
the election in one district of a candidate from one party, and in
the other districts of men of different political sentiments. And
does it thus avoid party spirit? Certainly not. We will then
have a diversity of opinion on the bench upon some political ques-
tion, which has by this means been drawn before them for adjudi-
cation. His opinion was that the majority should rule in all cases,
and that the principle was as applicable to the election of the ju-
diciary as any other department of the government.

Mr. PINCKNEY advocated an elective judiciary, to be chosen
by the people in districts, who were to hold office for the term of
ten years, and after that time the judges to be ineligible to a re-
election. He also desired the elective system to be submitted
every ten years to the people for their approval, and to be changed
if they so desired it.

Mr. HARVEY was in favor of an election of the supreme
judges by the whole people, and opposed entirely to their election
by districts. He considered that the duties of a judge of that
court were something different from those performed by a senator.
The one expounded and administered the law to the whole people,
and the other represented a section of the people. He thought the
difference in their relation to the people required a difference in
the mode of electing them, and applied the same argument to the
election of judges by districts, when the duties they would have to
perform were to govern and control the actions and interests of
the people at large. He considered the post of a judge not one of
a representative nature. He was to decide questions arising in
his court according to law, and not to suit the wishes and notions
of any particular section of the state, and hence the impropriety
of electing him by a portion of the people. He would be sorry to
see judges, elected from the north or south, deciding questions
according to the feelings and sentiments of the portion of the state
they came from. Much had been said about no party — that all
party feeling upon this question, and in the election of judges

WEDNESDAY, JULY 2t, 1847 473

should exist — that all demagogueism should be put down; but
from what had appeared to him, those who denounced party,
were the very ones who were most under the influence of party, and
showed most of its spirit.

Messrs. Pinckney and Davis of Massac explained their views
upon party, and a rather personal colloquy took place between the
latter gentleman and Mr. H.

Mr. HARVEY said he cared little about political life or death;
it was a matter of no importance to him. He would be sorry to
see local feelings and sentiments represented on the supreme bench.
He felt yesterday, when the gentleman from Sangamon had
sprung his mine, that a trap had been set for the friends of an
elective judiciary, and he regretted much that many had not seen
it before it was too late. That gentleman, by his profound and
skilful tactics, had succeeded in drawing into the snare a sufficient
number to defeat the general ticket system, and would, he scarcely
doubted, succeed in defeating an elective judiciary entirely. He
did not think the plan pursued by that gentleman, although suc-
cessful, was a fair one. And he had strong suspicions that beneath
the present proposed system there was hidden another mine,
which would be sprung at the proper time,and when it [would] be too
late for those friends of an elective judiciary, whom he had suc-
ceeded in drawing into his trap, to retrace their steps. He thought
that if the district system was adopted, they would find that there
was to be but one session of the supreme court in a year, and that
at Springfield, for the benefit of those lawyers who resided here.
He was opposed to all monopolies, and particularly to a monopoly
of the supreme court.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery asked if the gentleman considered
that he was a party to that scheme.

Mr. HARVEY. No, sir; I believe you are too honest a man,
but I think that, like others, you have been led into it without
seeing the object. Mr. H. then reviewed the argument that the
people would not know the candidates or their abilities, and
thought that the same argument would apply to the large divi-
sions proposed.

Mr. ALLEN said, that he was one of those who had voted for
striking out, and if he had fallen into the trap mentioned by the

474 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

member from Knox, he certainly was not aware of it. That mem-
ber says he saw the trap; but there he, perhaps, can see
many things that others cannot. He is somewhat strange. If
he happens to differ from other men upon any subject, he imme-
diately declares all wrong and he alone right. This was part of
the gentleman's nature and he could not help it. That gentleman
was opposed to the district system and to compelling the people to
select from districts; perhaps he thinks that in Knox county
there may be found three men competent to fill the post. He may
think so, but the people may differ from him, and they don't
like to have these judges selected, as it might occur, from Knox
or any other county. Mr. A. came here with no northern or
southern feelings; he came here divested of such sectional feelings
as far as it was possible. He was in favor of the election of the
justices of that court from the three grand divisions of the state,
so as that the people of all parts of the state might have the elec-
tion of one judge at least. He did not think the gentleman from
Knox should have said, that, because he entertained this opinion,
because he was in favor of the district system, and had followed
that course which alone could have allowed them to present it to
the Convention, they had fallen into a trap set for them; that they
had been deluded into an act the consequences of which they did
not know the importance. That this trap was sprung, and the un-
wary caught, by a combination of factions.

Mr. HARVEY said, he had used no such terms.

Mr. ALLEN. I then misunderstood the gentleman's lan-
guage, though I did not his meaning.

Mr. A. then alluded to the difficulties suggested that the
people in the districts would not know the candidate for the office,
and told the house that if a line were laid any where, south of
Springfield, that no man could be presented in the district lying
south of that line, with whom the people were not sufficiently ac-
quainted to decide upon his qualifications. If they were not
acquainted with the candidate personally, they could, by inquiry,
receive all necessary information upon the subject. And how did
the Governor select his judges? When a vacancy occurs, the
candidate for the vacancy, or his friends, get up a petition, setting
forth his abilities &c., and it is sent post haste to the Governor,

WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1847 475

and thus, a man who may be a total stranger to the Govern<jr
often obtains the appointment — by information derived from
others. He would vote for the election by districts, and if he
could not get that he would vote for the election by general
ticket.

Mr. LOGAN (a thunder storm raging without at the time)
replied to the remarks of [the] gentleman from Knox, and dis-
claimed any idea or contrivance to trap any persons.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, he desired to speak, but
being weak and the hour late, he moved the committee rise.
Which motion was lost.

Mr. SERVANT rose to defend the system of appointment by
the Governor and Senate, though he felt that his health required
he should avoid any excitement. Mr. S. spoke a few sentences
and then sunk back on the floor and fainted.

The committee rose and the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess presented the following as an
amendment to the proposed amendment of the gentleman from
Massac:

Strike out of that amendment, "and the qualified electors of
each division shall elect one of said supreme judges for the term of
six years," and insert in lieu thereof, "one of said judges shall
reside in each of said districts, and all of the said judges shall be
elected by the qualified voters throughout the state."

In presenting the above amendment Mr. C. said, that he
regretted most exceedingly that he and the gentleman from Massac
differed so widely upon this subject, and it pained him much that
he occupied a position in opposition to the election of the judges
by the whole people.

The great argument used on this question by the friends of the
district system, is that, by making selections from the three great
divisions of the state, we will get better men to fill the bench.
Well, sir, if we must select men from districts to get the best judges,
does not my proposition — to divide the state into three divisions
and that one shall be chosen from each of those districts, in the
same manner as they desire, obviate the whole difficulty and dan-

476 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ger which [it] is said is attached to the general ticket system ? Does
it not establish an independent judiciary selected from the dis-
tricts, and does it not disarm them of their great argument? If
his proposition were adopted then we may have the judges chosen
from the districts, and the whole people would have the privilege
of electing them. Would not the judges in such a case be selected
with greater care, with a greater regard for their ability and
qualification for the office than if voted for separately by districts?
The party at the north would go into Convention (for he presumed
that party nominations would be followed in either case,) and
they, for their district, present to the southern part of the state
a man every way qualified, by experience and legal acquirements,
for the office and ask its support; the south would do the same,
and so with the other district. Both parties in these district con-
ventions would select their best men, those whose reputation and
standing would ensure the confidence of the people, even beyond
the limits of the district; there would be a sectional pride to
present candidates who would be the least obnoxious to any
charge of incompetency, or want of the necessary ability and
attainments, which might be brought by the opposing party.
We thus would secure men for that bench who were chosen from
a confidence possessed by the whole people in their competency.
How different under the district system? There a man who as-
pired to the station might possess a political influence or a social
popularity in his own district independent of all legal ability, and
by those means secure to himself the election, and the people of
the whole state have one to preside over their interests incompetent
to the task, and whose principles they abhorred. When a man
of such a character received the nomination and under the general
ticket system his name was presented to the convention of the
whole state, there would be a close, scrutinizing examination
made into his character, his capacity and his standing, and the
convention would take care that none but competent men, such
as would receive the support of the whole people, would be pre-
sented to the state. Gentlemen say that the people in one section
of the state will not know these candidates, will know nothing of
their abilities or their standing as professional men. Was this so?
How did the people know the man for whom they vote for Cover-

WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1847 477

nor ? In almost every instance the people at large were unacquainted
with the candidate for Governor until after the nominations by
the conventions; there for the first time was his name heard by
them, and they inquired, they examined, they read, and long
before the election became familiar with his reputation and prin-
ciples. So would it be in regard to a candidate for the supreme
court — his character and legal acquirements would be examined
closely, his ability to perform the high office of a judge would be
inquired into, and the people would inform themselves upon the
subject, before they elevated any one to the supreme bench and
conferred upon him the great prerogative of passing upon their
lives, liberty and property. This fact alone would be a sufficient
inducement to the different parties to bring forward their best
men, and vie with each other in presenting candidates most
worthy of the confidence and support of the people.

He would refer gentlemen to the great state of N. York,
where a similar provision had been adopted, and to the result of
an election then for judges of the supreme court. Both parties
brought forward the ablest and wisest of their party. Were they
nominated for that office on exclusively political grounds, or on
account of political or party influence? No, sir; they were pre-
sented to the people as candidates for the bench — as men the most
eminently qualified to perform its important duties. — There was
a strife there as there will be here, between the two parties, to
present the ablest and most experienced men. From the argu-
ment of the gentleman from Sangamon, it would appear that he
thought no person was ever nominated for office by a convention,
except blackguards and ragmuffins, and that such characters
always had the best chance in conventions. He differed from the
gentleman: experience had shown them that, generally, the
best men of the state were brought forward by the conventions.
Bad men the result of party conventions! He would ask the
gentleman, or any other, to point out to him any man that had
been elevated to the bench in this state, by the democratic party,
whose judicial acts were complained of, or whose career had been
oppressive upon the people. Show him one. And he challenged
them to deny that such men, whose acts had drawn from the
people complaints long and loud against wrongs and oppressions

478 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

inflicted from the bench, which they could and would no longer
bear, did not belong exclusively to the whig party. Not one
single appointment from the democratic party had been complained
of. If he knew anything of the history of this state for the
last few years, he felt that he was right in his statement. The
great objection, and cause of complaint on the part of the people
had been against the manner in which these judges have been
made for the last few years. Heretofore the election of these
judges has been confided to the representatives of the people — the
General Assembly; and when a vacancy has occurred, it has been
the custom for the party in power to say to the representatives
from that portion of the state in which it has taken place: "Here,
gentlemen, is a vacancy — it is in your circuit — go, nominate a
man, and report him to us, and we will elect him." He was thus
selected by the few representatives from the circuit, and then
elected by the Legislature; but really by those few men of the
circuit, elected to the supreme court. The people saw this and
disapproved of it. They said: here is a man elected to the supreme
court with power and jurisdiction all over the state, and over us all;
and he has been elected to that high office and prerogative by a
few men of a single party, who represent, in the Legislature, a
small circuit down south, or up at the north, and we, who are to
be affected in our lives, liberty and property by his decisions,
have nothing to say in the matter. They have seen this thing
done, and have said, we will suffer it no longer. So of th's dis-
trict system. The people will not approve of it. They will say,
we desire that our voice may be heard in the choice of those
supreme judges, to whose hands are entrusted, and under whose
jurisdiction are to be secured, our rights, liberties and possessions.
This is the answer they will give to your district system— your
three grand divisions. The gentleman from Massac says, that
by this system we will have a conflict of opinion on the bench.
What kind of a conflict of opinion? Political, sectional, of mind,
or does he mean that conflict of legal opinion — that conflict which
will, from its operation, bring forward from their depths the hidden
resources of legal knowledge and learning — the result of study
and experience — to enable them to come to correct conclusions

WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1847 479

upon the questions before them? Can he mean that he desires
a conflict of opinion upon political questions on the bench?

Mr. DAVIS of Massac explained, that he thought that if the
court were elected by the whole people, there would be danger
that it might become biased in its action by party feeling and
spirit; but if elected from the three divisions, there would be a
conflict of the different opinions of those districts, and of their
diversified interests.

Mr. CAMPBELL. A conflict of the opinion of the different
sections of the state, and of their interests, is then what the gentle-
man means. And to obtain this, the judges must be elected in
three grand divisions — nothing else would accomplish the end.
He would ask the gentleman if there was any difference to the
representation of those interests upon the bench, if the judges
were chosen by the grand divisions, and then elected by the whole
people. He could see none except that the latter mode made the
judges more independent. There was a great difference between
judicial independence and judicial irresponsibility; much between
an independent judge, and an irresponsible one. — Take a judge
at home, in his own district, or in his own circuit — the people
of which elected him; a great and important question arises, in
which the whole interests of the state are concerned, and he makes
a decision upon it — what does he do? He decides to suit the
feelings and interests of the people of his district, and thus secures
his re-election, and that is all he cares for. He has no responsibil-
ity beyond his district. How different if he were responsible to
the whole people! Then his decision would have been one becom-
ing a judge of the supreme court of the state, and not that of a
judge of a district. What responsibility will a judge elected in
the southern district of this state feel he owes to the people of the
other two- thirds of the state? What cares he if they be satisfied
with his decisions on the bench? They have no voice in his re-
election, and all he has to do is to please the people of that district.
Will not his responsibility cease when he crosses the line of his own
district?

The want of room precludes our following the remarks of Mr.
C. further. He pursued the subject for some time in his usual
style. He asked if those, who said the question of a judiciary was

48o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

so pure that the foul hands of party spirit should not be permitted
to touch it, considered that there would be no party conventions
and party nominations, and party voting, under the district
system, as well as under the general ticket system? He thought
the only way to avoid it was to have one whig district, but this
had been refused by the gentleman from Sangamon. He alluded
to the many professions of the whigs, that they wanted no judge
of their party, &c., and to their cry of "no party" during the
canvass for members of this Convention, and to their general
success, by that means, in obtaining what they wanted — the
defeat of the democratic party. He scorned such tricks, prefer-
ring the bold, manly course of a whig like Harry of the West,
who never cried "no party." He saw no great privilege conferred
upon the people by this district system. A man came to the
court and his case was tried by judges, a majority of whom he
had no choice in electing, and so far as the privilege of being
tried by judges of his own choice, we might as well be tried by
a court in Missouri. The people had less to say in the choice
of their judges than when they were elected by their representative
in the Legislature. In replying to the remarks of Mr. Logan,
made during the storm, and to which that gentleman had alluded,
he remarked that it was true that there was a storm; that without
the lightning did play, the thunder did roar, and the rain did fall,
but it was in this hall that the wind blew. He replied to the
argument that the party would always vote for and elect the
nominees of the convention, by asking if they would not do the
same thing in the grand divisions. He thought that if the judges
were elected by the whole people, that there would be an emulation
among them to deserve the good will and approval of the whole
people, and a re-election based on their meritorious services.
He said that he would put a question to be submitted to the people:
here is one plan which divides the state, for the purpose of electing
a supreme court, into three grand divisions; you elect one of them
— with the other two you shall have nothing to do, nor in their
election a voice — they are given to your neighbors to elect. The
other plan is: here are three judges taken from different parts of
the state, but you, and your neighbors, and all the people of the
state, shall have the power of electing them. And he asked if any

WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1847 481

member would say that the people would reply that it is better
for us not to have any thing to do with the electing of two of these
judges, and our neighbors may elect them for us? He repelled
the charges made by members against the bar; and replied to the
member from Ogle, that he was perhaps in as great danger of losing,
in his absence from home, some of the choicest lambs of his flock,
as were the lawyers of losing their clients. He called upon his
friends to vote for the proposition he had presented. He alluded
to the appeal made by Mr. Logan on yesterday, by which he had
succeeded in striking out the general ticket system. He had called
upon the advocates of the district system to come to his aid,
while his own friends stood waiting for him, like Roderick Dhu,
to blow his shrill whistle, to spring into arms, and then at the
wave of his hand, to disappear. He asked gentlemen would they
follow that gentleman, who was calculating upon our going back
to the old system, in case we failed in the general ticket, and then
by uniting his votes with ours, defeat the elective judiciary entire-
ly. Were they prepared to be thus led ?

Mr. KNOWLTON was opposed to an elective judiciary; but
if we were to have it, he would vote for the district system in
preference to any other.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac returned his thanks to the gentleman
from Jo Daviess for his expressions of kindness, and assured him
that the difference of opinion was as painful to him as to that
gentleman. The gentleman from Jo Daviess had said, that he
(Mr. C.) [D. ?] had called upon the whig party to come to the rescue.
He had not called upon the whig party, nor any party, to come to
the rescue. He had said, that upon this question there was to be
no party, that there ought to be none; and if, for concluding that
the judiciary of the state should be separated from party spirit,
feeling and influence, he was to be anathamatized \sic\ and sepa-
rated from his party, he would say be it so. As Pitt and Fox said to
each other, if he was to be separated for this cause, "we separate,
and we separate forever." — He had made no such appeal, but he
had called upon all to abandon party lines on this question; and if
there was to be anathema and separation, he was ready to be
separated, on this question at least. He thought he saw in the
general ticket system a dark and impending gloom hanging over

482 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the future destinies of the state. He thought he saw the future
involved in a deep, dense and more impenetrable gloom than it was
possible for the mind of man to fathom. He thought the plan
proposed by the member from Jo Daviess one most artfully drawn
to deceive and draw to its support those who did not pause to
examine it. It retained one feature which he stood there honestly
and before God determined to resist. That feature was the elec-
tion by general ticket. We are told that the districts may meet
in convention and nominate a man, and that when the state con-
vention met, they would ratify it. But we know the danger of
such conventions. He referred the gentleman to a convention
which met a few years ago in a city in this Union, for the purpose
of nominating no less a candidate than for the chief executive
office if the country. A large majority of the delegates to that
convention, before they left their homes, were instructed by their
states to vote for a particular individual, but when they got there
they disobeyed their instructions, and nominated another man.
He opposed the general ticket system because of its dangers; he
had always been opposed to the election of the supreme judges,
but had yielded to what had been the expressed opinion of the
people, and to their demand. Mr. D. continued for some time in
stating his principles, and in repelling the charge of collusion or
combination, for the purpose of carrying his plan.

The question was then taken on substituting Mr. Davis'
amendment for Mr. Servant's, in the motion to insert, and the
same was decided in the affirmative — yeas 78, nays 41.

The question was then taken on the proposed amendment
of Mr. Campbell and decided in the negative — yeas 49, nays 78.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to strike out six years
(the term of office) and insert "nine." 12 and 15 years were
also proposed; and the question being taken, the Convention
refused to strike out.

Mr. PETERS presented the following as a substitute:

"The Governor shall nominate, and by and with the advice
and consent of the senate, (two-thirds of the senators elected
concurring therein) shall appoint the judges of the supreme court,
who shall hold their office for the term of nine years, and shall be

WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1847 483

ineligible to any other office than a judicial one for the time for
which they were appointed, and for one year thereafter."

Mr. PETERS said, that he was not going to make a speech
in favor of the amendment now offered, inasmuch as he had given
his views at length when the proposition of his friend from Ran-
dolph (Mr. Servant) was under consideration. The Convention
had then listened to him for a long time, for which he felt under
the greatest obligation. He had now only to say that he earnestly
desired every member to look at the pictures which the friends of
the elective principle had been drawing on yesterday and to-day.
The friends of that system had divided into two parties; one
party was in favor of electing the judges by general ticket, by
the electors throughout the state; the other party was for divid-
ing the state into three grand divisions or districts, and each dis-
trict to elect one judge of the supreme court. The friends of the
general ticket system declare to us, and they have repeated it
again and again, that the district system is fraught with the most
enormous evils — that each judge will represent a locality and not
the people of the whole state, though he is to be judge of the state;
that there will be no feeling of responsibility resting upon him;
that they will be elected in reference to local questions; that they
will be subject to corrupt influences. Various other evils are im-
puted to this mode of election, all going to show that it will degrade
and prostrate the judiciary. Those in favor of the district
system tell us that the other plan will produce only "evil and
evil continually;" that the election of the judges will at once
be subjected to the control and machinery of political par-
ties; that nominations will be made by political caucuses;
that the people will have but little to do in fact with the
election, but all will be subjected to party drill; that we shall
have party judges; inefficient and unqualified men will fill those
stations, and all sorts of enormities and iniquities will be intro-
duced into the judiciary. Whether, owing to the different
degree of talent of the speakers or not, he did not know, but
so it was that the advocates of the district system had made
the general ticket system appear much worse, more hideous, if
possible, than the general ticket men had made the district system
appear. Taking the pictures drawn by the advocates of the

484 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

two systems or modes of election proposed, and it seemed enough
to him to terrify us, and induce us to resort to the good old prin-
ciple of appointment. But he should not argue the point further.
He felt as if the arguments used by him when discussing this
subject the other day, were greatly strengthened by the high
coloring these gentlemen had given to their respective pictures.
He would, therefore, end as he [had] begun, by asking gentlemen to
look at the pictures which the friends of the elective principle had
drawn; to look at them in all the deformity which their own
friends had given them, (and no one would doubt the truth of
the picture,) and then let gentlemen vote as their judgments and
consciences would dictate. He was willing to leave the question
here.

And the question being taken on the substitute, it was rejected
— yeas 40, nays not counted.

Mr KENNER moved to amend by inserting — "shall be
elected by both branches of the Legislature, on joint ballot, on
the first Monday of March;" and the same was rejected.

Mr. SERVANT moved to strike out "six years," and insert,
"during good behavior." Rejected.

Mr. WEAD moved to add to the section, "the Legislature
may change or alter said divisions to meet the exigencies of the
people."

Messrs. Wead and Caldwell advocated the amendment, and
Messrs. Logan and Edwards of Sangamon opposed it.

Without taking the question, the committee rose, and, on
motion, the Convention adjourned till tomorrow at 8 a. m.

XXXVI. TITURSDAY, JULY 22, 1847

Mr. CROSS, of Winnebago, presented a petition praying that
no distinction be made in the constitution on account of color.
Referred to the committee on Bill of Rights.

Mr. STADDEN presented a petition, praying the appoint-
ment of a superintendent of schools. Referred to the com-
mittee on Education.

Mr. GEDDES asked a suspension of the rules, to enable
him to offer a resolution, that we proceed forthwith to the election
of a chaplain, and the Convention refused to suspend the rules.

[Mr. GEDDES said,*' he had been exceedingly pained by the
course which this convention had taken in relation to the clergy-
men of Springfield. The conduct of the convention, he said, had
been disgraceful in the extreme. They had first invited clergy-
men into the hall to invoke the blessings of heaven upon the
deliberations of this body, to ask for that wisdom which alone
could guide their deliberations to beneficial and happy results;
and now by their action they had declared to those clergymen,
"we can do without your services; we had rather dispense with
them than to defend and protect you from insult and injury."
Is this, continued, Mr. Geddes, the proper conduct of this con-
vention ? Are we become so graceless that a minister of the gospel
is not safe among us? When the convention for framing the
constitution of the United States was in session, it is well known,
that after much time had been spent to no purpose, and it had
become apparent to all that they would not be able to effect any-
thing;— in this hour of darkness and doubt and almost of despair,
the sage, Franklin rose and offered a resolution for the appoint-
ment of a chaplain, to invoke the blessing of Heaven upon their

" This debate on Geddes' resolution is taken from the Sangamo Journal,
July 29.

485

486 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

deliberations. The resolution was adopted, and what was the
result? Concentration of strength, unanimity of action, and
mutual concession of opinion, which eventuated in the adoption
of the glorious constitution under which the union of these States
was formed. Then, sir, glad angels on shining pinions winged
their way up through the boundless fields of ether to the court of
Heaven, and there proclaimed the joyful news that man in the
new world had asked a boon of Heaven, — had asked the guidance
and direction which Heaven alone can give, — and Heaven's high
arches rung with sounds of joy, and Heaven's guidance was vouch-
safed to their deliberations. Thus has it been from that time
with all deliberative bodies who have acted in a similar spirit.
But this convention is deserting the good old path; is departing
from the counsels of the wise and prudent, and like one of whom
we have read in scripture history, is carried away with vain con-
ceits, and will finally, I apprehend, meet with a similar destiny.

But what heinous crime has been committed by the Reverend
gentleman? Has he insulted officers, abused our members,
spoken disrespectfully of our doings? Nothing of the kind ! But
he has dared to do his duty, even when that duty compelled him to
speak of the faults and follies of the men whom Illinois delights
to honor. This is the awful offence which he has committed.
He spoke of the demoralizing effects of war, and stated, it was
said, that the returned volunteers were not free from its contam-
inating influence. He was solicitous that the wreath of martial
glory which crowned their brows should not be sullied by immoral
conduct; that the bright laurels so dearly earned should not be
torn from their brows by their own intemperate hands; and that
the monument, bright as gold, and more durable than marble,
which they had reared for themselves, should not be overturned
and trampled in the dust by their own rash feet hastening to do
evil. And for this he was to be rebuked by this convention.
He could see no impropriety on the part of the clergymen in refer-
ring to these things, but he thought that the conduct of members
here admitted of no excuse.

Mr. Green of Tazewell, opposed the suspension of the rules,
on the ground that we had by resolution invited the clergy
to attend here — and that we had subsequently desired them not to

THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1847 487

attend, because we could not protect them from insult; and it
would be inconsistent now, and unjust to them, to go into the
election of a chaplain.

Mr. Williams said, he hoped the resolution would be with-
drawn, for another reason in addition to the one stated by the
gentleman from Tazewell. He had at the commencement of the
session passed a resolution under which chaplains had been pro-
cured, and they had rescinded that resolution, on the ostensible
ground that it was wrong to invite them here to be subjected to
gross insult.

The election of another chaplain would appear invidious. It
would look as if the real object of rescinding the resolution, was
to get rid of our chaplains and to procure others. He was, for
this reason alone, in hopes the resolution would be withdrawn.
If neither the sense of decorum and propriety of the individual
members of the Convention, nor its rules, could secure our former
chaplains from the rude and indecent insult offered by one of its
members, what guaranty could we offer to a new chaplain that he
would not be subject to similar insults? Until the Convention
asserted the power of compelling its members to behave them-
selves with propriety and decency, he was opposed to the appoint-
ment of a chaplain.]

Mr WEST asked a suspension of the rules, to enable him to
offer a resolution in relation to the apportionment of counties, and
the Convention refused to suspend.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to suspend the rules, that he might
offer the following resolution, and the rules were suspended:

Resolved, That fifteen hundred copies of the journal of the
Convention be printed for distribution among the counties.

Messrs. Thomas and Davis of Montgomery opposed the
printing of more than a single copy. — Messrs. Casey, Hayes,
Archer, Lockwood, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Church, Sherman
and others advocated the adoption of the printing, and after
debate, the resolution was adopted.

Mr. THOMAS moved to suspend the rules, to enable him to
offer a resolution, that a committee be appointed to divide the
state into three grand judicial divisions.

488 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess thought the gentleman from
Morgan rather hasty with his resolution. The Convention had
not decided yet, whether there would be any "three grand divi-
sions," and the resolution was perhaps a little premature.

The Convention then refused to suspend the rules.

The Convention then resolved itself into commit[tee] of the
whole, and resumed the business before it yesterday. The ques-
tion pending was on the amendment of Mr. Wead, and being
called thereon, it was decided in the negative. Yeas 50, nays 79.

Messrs. Lockwood and Marshall of Mason, presented
amendments, which were adopted; and Messrs. Kitchell,
Shumway, Jones, Robbins and Palmer of Macoupin amend-
ments, which were rejected. After which, the section as amended,
read as follows:

"The state shall be divided into three grand divisions, as
nearly equal as may be, and the qualified electors of each division
shall elect one of said supreme judges, for the term of six years.
The Legislature may, from time to time, alter said divisions,
previous to any general election for judges of the supreme court,
so that each of said divisions may contain, as nearly as may be,
an equal number of inhabitants; and also, each division shall
contain territory, as nearly as [may] be, in a compact form; and pro-
vided, that such changes or alterations shall not be made at any
other time, than is provided for the apportionment of members of
the General Assembly."

And the question being taken thereon, it was adopted. Yeas
80, nays not counted.

Sec. 5. The Secretary of State shall, in the presence of the
same person or persons, draw the names of the said justices by
lot; the justice, whose name is first drawn, shall be chief justice,
and hold his office for six years; the second drawn shall hold his
office four years; the other, two years; and each until his successor
is commissioned and qualified. Thereafter, an election shall be
held every two years, on the first Monday of March, for one judge
of the supreme court, who shall hold his office six years, and until
his successor is qualified. After the term of the first chief justice
expires, the justice oldest in commission, shall be chief justice.

THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1847 489

Mr. WEAD moved to strike out the section, and insert the
following; which was carried:

Sec. 4. [5 ?] The office of one of said judges shall be vacated in
two years, of one in four years, and of one in six years; to be
decided by lot, so that one of said judges shall be elected once in
every two years. The judge having six years to serve shall be the
first chief justice, after which, the judge having the oldest com-
mission, shall be chief justice.

Sec. 6. One term of the supreme court shall be held annually
in each judicial circuit, at such time and place as may be provided
by law.

Mr. WEAD moved to strike out the section, and insert — " the
supreme court shall sit at least once in each year, in each of the
three grand divisions in this state, and in such other places as
may be prescribed by law."

Mr. WEAD advocated the amendment, which while it made
it imperative for the court to sit at three different parts of the
state during the year, also, left it in the power of the Legislature
to increase the number of those sittings, as the convenience and
interest of the people required.

Mr. KNOX would like to know from the gentleman, if his
amendment did accomplish his end, or if it did not do too much.
What "other places" did he intend the court should sit in, that
were not comprised in the three divisions? Did he mean to send
the supreme court to Iowa or Oregon?

Mr. HENDERSON advocated the section as it stood, and
was in favor of twelve circuits and the supreme court to visit each,
during the year.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery would be in favor of the larger
number of circuits if the salary allowed the judges had been suffi-
cient to support and remunerate them for the expenses of travel-
ling and of board while from home.

Mr. HARVEY advocated the larger number of circuits, and
the supreme court to visit each, during the year.

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau was opposed to the larger number of
circuits, and in favor of the amendment.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac hoped the amendment would pass.

Mr. WEAD modified his amendment to avoid the difficulty

490 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

suggested by Mr. Knox, and replied at length to the remarks of
gentlemen who had opposed its adoption.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess opposed the three judicial
districts as not sufficient for the convenience of the bar and the
people, whose interests they represented. He was in favor of at
least five districts and five judges. He admitted the salary
allowed them was not sufficient to allow them to travel over the
whole state. He thought the Convention ought to fix in the
constitution the number of judges and the number of districts;
and were it not for the palpable injustice of the act — to compel
men who received only such a salary as we had allowed them, to
travel the whole state, he would be in favor of the supreme court
sitting in each district in the state.

Mr. HAYES advocated the smaller number of districts and
replied to the other gentlemen.

Mr. CALDWELL was in favor of the amendment and opposed
to the supreme court travelling over the whole state. He thought
once a year in each of the three divisions quite sufficient.

And, without taking the vote, the committee rose, and then,
on motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole.

Mr. LOGAN addressed the Convention in an argument in
support of one central supreme court, to meet at the capital of the
state, and presented its advantages and benefits at length. In
conclusion, he said that he would vote as for a compromise for the
three sittings — once in each division.

Mr. ATHERTON (during the speech of Mr. L.) rose and de-
manded the enforcement of the half hour rule.

The rules were suspended and Mr. L. proceeded.

Mr. ATHERTON explained his reason for his demand to be,
that Mr. L. had occupied three times as much of the time of the
Convention as any other member had, and his long speeches had
already cost the state ;^io,ooo. Moreover, he had complained to
Mr. L. a few days before, of the great loss of time by long speeches,
and that gentleman told him in reply, " why don't you enforce your

THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1847 491

rule and cut them off." He therefore had followed the advice in
the present case.

Mr. DEMENT addressed the committee for nearly two hours
in opposition to the amendment. He thought that the debate had
wandered from the question, and would endeavor to give it a new
turn. He did not think it a question in which lawyers alone were
concerned, but one of vast importance to the people, at least one
in which the people he represented felt a great interest in. From
the debate between the several members of the bar it had been
hinted that the less the number of circuits for the supreme court,
the more advantageous it would be for the older and more expe-
rienced members of the bar, because those from a distance could
not attend, for so small a fee, to the case of their client at Springfield,
as could a lawyer who resided here, and consequently the people
had to intrust all their appeal cases to those who practice in that
court. This was unjust to the younger lawyers, and unjust to
the people. The people desired to have the courts, wherein the
cases in which their rights and interests were involved, brought as
near them as possible, and that they could attend it and give their
personal aid and attention in assisting their counsel. This
could only be done by having a large number of districts, and
the supreme court to visit them all in each year. Many gen-
tlemen seemed disposed to favor the amendment because of the
low salary allowed to the judges. He admitted that ? 1,200 was
not sufficient for them, when we compelled them to traverse
the state, but thought it was no argument against our devising
the best plan for the convenience and interests of the people,
and the system which would be most satisfactory to them. If
we adopted the plan which would enable the people in all parts
of the state to have the facility of justice, by bringing this supreme
court near their door, he appealed to the whole committee whether
any man should hesitate a moment in raising the salary of each
of the three judges to ^1,500 — increasing the annual expense but
$900. Must we deny the people the great benefits of the system
of a large number of districts, because of the miserable sum of
$900 additional tax? He thought not; nor did the people expect
such economy. On this subject the people felt a great interest,
and he warned gentlemen that it behooved them to engraft some-

492 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

thing into the constitution that would be satisfactory enough to
the people to induce them to overlook other provisions not at all
acceptable, and which, unless such popular systems as this are
adopted, would probably defeat the constitution. The argument
that appeal cases would increase if the number of districts was
enlarged, was, in his opinion, rather in favor of the plan than
against it. If cases were worthy of an appeal, justice required
that the means of prosecuting that appeal should be placed as
near the reach of the party desiring it as possible. The member
from Sangamon had said, that lawyers who practised in the
supreme court do not charge more than those in the circuit. This
might be easily accounted for. That member resides here, and
he can afford to attend a case before the court here for much less
than can a man who has to come two hundred miles, to leave his
home and business, and remain here probably six weeks, waiting
for the case to come on. The consequence of this was, that the
clients in the country were unable to pay the attorney the sum
required for such a duty, and often abandoned the appeal, sooner,
than bear the expense or entrust a lawyer with it, to whom he was
a stranger. He was in favor of throwing open to the whole pro-
fession a competition for the fees of attending to cases in the su-
preme court, and that there should be no monopoly. He objected
to the amendment, because there would be certain localities
selected in each of the divisions, at which it would be as inconven-
ient for the people and their lawyers to attend as if the court was
held here alone. In the northern district, Chicago would be
selected, as perhaps it ought to be; and he would ask, would it
not be more inconvenient for a large portion of the district to
attend there, than it would to come to Springfield? Again,
where would be the place in the southern district at which the court
would sit? Would you have it on the Mississippi? What would
the people of the Wabash counties think of its convenience?
Would you put it at Shawneetown; would not the people of
Alton prefer Springfield as the place, sooner than go there. The
only way to meet the difficulty was to hold a session of the court
in each circuit, and let that number of circuits be large. Let
them be held at Chicago, Peoria, Galena, Quincy, Springfield,
Alton, Shawneetown, Danville, and such other places as would

THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1847 493

meet the convenience of the people. They would be satisfied
with this, and it was our duty to have the constitution as satis-
factory as possible. The member from Gallatin had said, the
court, if the state was cut up into small districts, would often have
but a single case to try in a circuit, which would be a contemptible
business for the supreme court. He could not see how it would be
derogatory to a court, elected by the people, and paid by the
people, to go any where the convenience of the people required
them to go, for the purpose of trying even one case. The court
would be physically competent to the task, and if we paid them
sufficient we could obtain men to do it. He did not think that
we could get the best lawyers at any salary, nor did he believe that,
if we said the court shall meet but once a year, and that here for
six weeks, we could get the pick of the bar. But we still might get
good judges, and men mentally competent to the duty.

The gentleman from Sangamon said that you could not elevate
the court above the character and standing of the bar that prac-
tised before it, and the conclusion he (Mr. D.) drew from this,
and from that gentleman's opposition to the large number of
districts, was that he considered it would be lessening the dignity
of the bar to be brought down to the level of the lawyers in the
counties, and that then the court would be brought down in its
dignity to the same level with the bar. What other conclusion
could one come to from the remark, except that the supreme court
lawyers would be degraded by associating with a class of lawyers
who had never practised in such a high court, and consequently the
court being brought to the level of the bar would become less
dignified. He did not think this would be the case but that both
lawyers and court would be elevated by the association. He
associated the gentleman from Gallatin (Mr. Caldwell) so far
as his remark that the court would become contemptible, if it
descended to sit and try one case, with the member from Sanga-
mon, and he sincerely hoped that they were not associated any
further.

Mr. D. then entered at large upon the subject of the election
of the supreme judges by the whole people, as compared with the
election by districts. He thought the only argument in favor of
the district system was a want of confidence in the people, a

494 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

doctrine to which he never subscribed, and would never support.
Should this district system be finally adopted and they went home
to the people, what answer could they make, when the people said
^you allowed me by this constitution you have adopted, the right
and privilege of voting for the judge of the circuit court, why did
you withhold from me the right to vote for the two supreme judges
who decide my case? The only answer the friends of this system
could give, would be " I could not give you that right, I could
not trust you with such a power." This was a variation on the
part of some gentlemen from their long known and well estab-
lished opinion of full confidence in the people on all subjects.
He examined at length the subject of the election by districts and
its probable political bearing and results, and concluded by remark-
ing that he would vote for the three judicial districts in case he
could get no better.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac said, that the committee would do him
the justice to say that he never detained them for any length of
time in expressing his views, and that he addressed them but sel-
dom, and he now assured the committee that nothing but what he
regarded [as] a systematic attack upon him, and that attack, too,
from a quarter where he little looked for it, would induce him to
address the committee again on this question. He therefore asked
the attention of the committee for a few moments while he would
repel the systematic attack that had just been made upon him
and upon those of his friends who had acted with him on this
question, tor some cause or another which did not appear. Yester-
day he had done what he considered his duty. He had opposed a
plan which he thought full of danger and ruin, and for this had
drawn down upon his head the anathema of these gentlemen who
insinuate that my course would indicate that there was "some-
thing rotten in the state of Denmark," which their perceptive
faculties will not allow them to penetrate. Sir, there is a great
and important question before the committee, of the utmost
interest to the liberties and rights of the people of the state, and to
affect them for all time to come, and upon it I did not expect
to be denounced for taking a position I thought best calculated to
advance the people's interests, nor to be abandoned by the
exclusive advocates of the rights of the people. He had said

THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1847 495

yesterday that upon this subject his own opinions were opposed to
an elective judiciary, but that he had given up his own opinions
to that of the people, and to their demand, and in doing so had
followed the example of the apostle of democracy, Thomas Jeffer-
son, who has said that in all doubtful questions give way to the
majority. And yet, sir, they say that he (Mr. D.) had aban-
doned democracy and the people. He would say to them that,
upon this great question, one which was to secure a free, independ-
ent judiciary, so vitally important to the people, they had
abandoned the true interests of the people, and were found fighting
in the ranks of the enemy. He would say to those who charged
him with deserting democracy, to go back into history and search
there, let them read more, study more, and try to understand what
they do read, and then they will be better able to come here and
tell us what is democracy. He would ask them to go back to the
days of Washington. No such doctrine as the election of judges
was taught then, go to the days of Jefferson — the first man who
lisped the name of democracy in our country — and he asked them,
was this election of judges by general ticket taught then? No,
sir, no. It was the doctrine taught by men anxiously looking for
the spoils. Let them read more and then tell us if spoils be democ-
racy! He was opposed to the general ticket system because it
afforded such inducements to men. If it be democracy to look
out for the spoils of office, then he was no spoilsman, and belonged
not to such a democracy. He would not have alluded to this
subject had it not been for what was so evidently a systematic
attack upon him for some unknown cause. He did not think that
so humble a man as himself could have been the sole object of
this studied attack, but there must be some causes which did not
appear, and unless he was much mistaken, it authorized him in
saying that there was "something rotten in the state of Denmark."
He battled for principle and upon these other matters he cared not
to break a lance with the gentleman from Lee, although there were
some in the other party, who might not be so well able to defend
themselves from the charge of a change in political principles. He
had opposed the general ticket system because he saw in its results
a judiciary swayed by political influences and corrupt motives,
which he thought would be prejudicial to the interests and rights

496 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of the people, and when the gentleman from Lee said that he
opposed the district system he it was that attacked the rights and
liberties of the people in the most vital point — a pure judiciary.

Mr. DEMENT explained.

Mr. DAVIS said, well, sir, the gentleman voted against the
motion to strike out the general ticket system, he voted for a sys-
tem that did affect injuriously the people.

Mr. DEMENT said, that he did vote against striking out
the general ticket system, and would vote for the appointment
of the judges by the Governor and Senate in preference
to the district system. While up he would ask the member from
Massac, if he alluded to him when he spoke of persons having
changed their principles ?

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir, no; but there are those in the Conven-
tion who may, peradventure, have an opportunity of making an
explanation upon that subject before the adjournment.

Mr. DEMENT would ask the gentleman another question.
Did he allude to him as one of those who had made a systematic
attack upon him? If he did he was mistaken.

Mr. DAVIS said, that he was not a man to back out of what he
had said, or to avoid its consequences, he would inform the gentle-
man that he did allude to him. But his disclaimer was sufficient.

Mr. DEMENT said, the gentleman was mistaken, they had
been friends and had always acted together and he would be the
last man that would attack that member, or throw a fire-brand
into the Convention.

Mr. DAVIS said, that he was glad to hear the gentleman say
that he had no desire to throw fire-brands into this Convention,
but it is strange, sir, what events will occur in a short time. Before
this Convention met he understood that the opinion of a large
majority of the people of this state was in favor of a total prohibi-
tion of banks; but when we come here we find out that the people
have an opinion on this subject, and that there are some who
think that the people have a right to be heard on the subject, and
then sometimes we hear certain gentlemen declare that John
Thompson has the right to control them. There was another
thing said which was almost beneath notice. He had heard it on
the stump, by wild political demagogues, but it was something

THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1847 497

not to be expected from a gentleman, or in a constitutional con-
vention— it was the miserable cant about lawyers. He would tell
them to go to English history if they knew nothing of, or did not
place confidence in American history, and read what was written
there about the men who first nursed this republic into existence.
Let them go to John Adams, to Jefferson, and see what they —
lawyers — did for the country, and even what English history says
of their efforts for the country. Let them read of Madison, of
Monroe, of John Quincy Adams and of General Jackson, who,
though endeared to the people by his achievements as a military
chieftain, was a lawyer, let them see what these men, all lawyers,
did for their country; let them, before they make attacks upon
that profession, first read a little history.

He would say a few words upon the question now before them.
What was proposed by the system of twelve circuits for the su-
preme court to travel. The judges were to be taken away from
their homes to travel this whole state, the year round; no time
allowed them for reading, for study, for examination, or for prep-
aration for one of the highest and most important duties that
can be conferred upon man — the passing upon the lives and liber-
ties and property of his fellow man. It was acknowledged that
the pay we had allowed them was insufficient, but pay was no
argument with him. All history told them that a man to discharge
that duty well, must have time for preparation. All experience
had shown that no man, even with a genius as bright and eff'ulgent
as the noon-day sun, could perform the duties of that station,
which requires years of constant reading and study to become
qualified, without time for preparation for its offices. It is the
supreme court of our state; it should be a dignified, enlightened,
upright, and an honest supreme court, or the judiciary sinks into
insignificance. He was not in favor of spreading the supreme cir-
cuits all over the state and into every county, to enable small
petti-fogging lawyers to bring cases into the supreme court, not
knowing or caring whether the law was with them or not; but
merely for the purpose of having a case in that court.

Mr. D. gave way, without concluding, for a motion that the
committee rise; which was carried. And then, on motion, the
Convention adjourned.

XXXVII. FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847

Mr. FARWELL presented a petition of citizens of Stephenson
county for the appointment of a state superintendent of com-
mon schools. Referred to the Education committee.

Mr. SERVANT, from the committee to which was referred
the petition of citizens of Kaskaskia, in reference to their "common
fields," reported an amendment securing to them the same rights
as are now guaranteed with respect to those lands, with additional
power to lease or sell the same by a vote of the inhabitants inter-
ested. Laid on the table and two hundred copies ordered to be
printed.

The Convention went into committee of the whole on the
amendments to the sixth section of the report of the Judiciary
committee, pending at the adjournment yesterday.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean addressed the Convention in favor of
holding the supreme court at the seat of government.

Mr. HARVEY replied, and advocated the holding of the
supreme court in every judicial circuit.

Mr. WILLIAMS replied to Mr. Harvey, and advocated a
central supreme court.

Mr. KNOX followed and advocated the striking out of the
sixth section of the report.

A vote was then taken on striking out. Lost — yeas 58, nays
61.

Mr. ECCLES moved to amend the section so as to provide
that if the people desire it, the courts may be changed from the
circuits to the seat of government or to one point in [each?] one
of the grand divisions. Change to be made not oftener than
once in six years.

Mr. HARVEY moved a substitute; which was not agreed to.

Question recurred on Mr. Eccles' amendment.

Mr. CALDWELL offered a substitute, so as to provide that
one term of the supreme court should be held at such time and
places as may be provided by law.
498

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 499

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess made a speech in opposition
to imposing restrictions upon the Legislature in reference to the
matters under consideration.

Mr. GREGG spoke against the re[st]rictions which the
amendments were calculated to impose on the Legislature. He
was willing to leave a little discretion to the Legislature to change
the system to suit such a change of times and circumstances as
might take place. He had confidence in the people and believed
that they understood and would promote their own interest.

The vote being taken the substitute was not agreed to.

An amendment to Mr. E's amendment was moved and lost.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to strike out "the seat of govern-
ment." Lost.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair moved a substitute so as to prevent
the Legislature from authorizing the court to be holden in less
than five different places in the state. Lost.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess offered as a substitute, "so
as to provide that the Legislature should change the places of
holding the courts as the interests of the people might require."
Lost.

Various amendments were then offered and voted down.

The question recurring on Mr. Eccles' amendment it was
agreed to — yeas 72, nays 51.

Section 7 was then taken up.

Sec. 7. There shall be twelve judicial circuits, which may be
increased from time to time as the Legislature may provide.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to strike out "twelve," and insert
"nine."

Mr. CALDWELL moved to strike out "section seven" and
insert the following:

Sec. 7. The state shall be divided into twenty judicial circuits,
in each of which one circuit judge shall be elected by the qualified
electors thereof, who shall hold his office for the term of four years,
and until his successor shall be commissioned and qualified."

A discussion arose upon this proposition; pending which the
committee rose, reported back the report with amendments, and
asked the concurrence of the Convention.

Soo ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

[Mr. DAVIS of McLean,^^ advocated the establishment of the
Supreme^ Court at the Seat of Government. He was utterly
opposed to its being held in circuits; at all events, he said, the
number of places at which it should be held ought not to exceed
three. The experience of other States in regard to this matter
was strictly conclusive to his mind against the practicability of
multiplying the number of places where that Court should be
held. He referred to the States of Missouri and Tennessee, where
the experiment had been tried, and where it was ascertained that
correct decisions could not be obtained in that way. The argu-
ments of gentlemen who had adverted to the practice in Mass-
achusetts, as an example to be followed in this State, were of little
force, inasmuch as the condition of things there was entirely
different. There they had good libraries in all parts of the state,
and every requisite facility for holding the court at different
places, which was not the case in this state, but he entirely dis-
approved of the system as pursued in Massachusetts; he con-
sidered it highly objectionable under any circumstances. The
decisions of the supreme court were the law of the land, and great
care should be taken to make them as perfect as possible, by
having the best judges that could be obtained, together with
every aid to be derived from books and arguments of able counsel —
and this could never be accomplished if the supreme court was
made a travelling court and required to give its decisions in the
various districts of the state. The increase of litigation under
such a system would also tend to embarrass the court, and to
render their decisions hasty and imperfect. Gentlemen might
impute to him motives of personal interest in this matter, but he
could with truth assert that personal considerations had no weight
with him whatever. He preferred the practice in the circuit court
and could not be induced to relinquish it in favor of the supreme
court.

Another consideration, which was entitled to much weight,
was, that if a number of circuits were established for the supreme
court, competent judges could not be obtained; for the salary
that was proposed. Even two thousand dollars a year would not

<2This debate by Davis, Williams, Knox, and others, is taken from the
Sangamo Journal, July 29.

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 501

justify a man who was well qualified for the office in accepting it,
if he were obliged to travel all over the state. He hoped at all
events, that the committee would see the propriety of providing
that the number of places at which the supreme court should be
held, should not exceed three.

Mr. WILLIAMS said he felt some solicitude in this matter,
and it was a question in which all the people of the State were
deeply interested. He did not concur in the objections which
some gentlemen seemed to entertain, that by fixing one, or even
two or three places only, for the sitting of the Supreme Court,
they would be depriving any portion of the people of the benefit
of the supervision and control of that court over the inferior tri-
bunals of the country. It was not proposed that in doing this
its jurisdiction should be limited to one district or to one county.
The only question was, where that court could best hold its ses-
sions for the supervision and control of the decisions of the inferior
courts. Gentlemen had argued the question as if they appre-
hended that by fixing it at one, two, or three places only, the
benefits to be derived from it would be but partial, and would not
extend equally to the whole State.

The gentleman from Knox (Mr. Harvey), had told the com-
mittee that it was to him immaterial whether the court should
be held here or at Quincy. The gentleman then, did not require
that it should be carried throughout each circuit; carried, accord-
ing to the popular phrase, to each man's door. It was only nec-
essary then according to the gentleman's showing, in order to
secure every portion of the State the benefits intended to be
secured by the establishment of a supreme court that its jurisdic-
tion should extend all over the State, and that any person, when
injustice was done him by the decision of an inferior court, should
have a reasonable opportunity to have that decision reversed by
the supreme court. It had been well remarked by the gentleman
from White, that parties litigant would have no occasion to bring
their witnesses to attend the supreme court; the court acting only
upon the record, determining the points reserved for its decision
which were thought to be erroneously determined by the inferior
court. — Where was the necessity, then, for carrying that court
into different counties or circuits? Did gentlemen expect that all

502 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the suitors in the circuit would attend at the place of holding the
supreme court? There was no necessity for their doing so. The
attorney did not require to be advised by his client regarding the
points observed for the decision of the supreme court. He could
attend the case just as well without the presence of his client.

It was important that there should be a supreme court for the
purpose of correcting the errors committed by the inferior courts.
It was important that that court should be upright, intelligent
and independent; and it was also important that it should have
an opportunity of investigating every case that might be presented;
it was important that the judges should be men whose learning,
intelligence and wisdom, would afford all the facilities for enabling
them to arrive at just conclusions. How was this to be effected?
By sending the judges hurriedly around the State and requiring
them to decide cases hastily and without the aid of books for refer-
ence, which were not to be obtained at all places, or by holding
the courts at one or two places where access might be had to
libraries? Would any one say that the probability of obtaining
a correct judgment was not in favor of having the court estab-
lished at one or two places, instead of sending persons around like
missionaries without affording them time for investigation, with-
out affording them the aid of precedents and authorities which
were to be found only in libraries, and suffering them to be in-
fluenced by clamors to be raised by the suitors? If this was the
course to be taken, he thought the result would be immature
decisions, and a consequent insecurity of the rights of the parties
litigant. But if the court were allowed to hold its sittings at
one or two places only, there would be an opportunity for investi-
gation, and a correct line of decision might be relied upon. The
gentleman from Knox had argued unfairly. The precedents to
which he had referred in support of his plan for a perambulating
court, were in fact of a different character from the court of which
he was speaking. The gentleman had remarked that the justices
in England had their circuits in which they held courts at different
places; but the gentleman did not draw the distinction between
the trials of cases at nisi prius in which the justices were sometimes
engaged, and the determination of cases in banco regis, which was
analagous to our supreme court. Justices of the king's bench, it

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 503

was true, had circuits for the purpose of holding the trial of cases
at nisi prius, but they afterwards met at Westminster Hall in
banco regis, and there determined cases arising in all parts of the
kingdom. The gentleman had also stated that the judges of the
supreme court of the United States traveled round in their respec-
tive circuits. So they did; but not for the trial of appeals, they
traveled as circuit judges; appeals were carried to them at Wash-
ington. The sitting of the supreme court was always held at
Washington. The examples adduced by the gentleman were
against his position, they proved exactly the reverse of that which
the gentleman desired; and unless the gentleman was prepared to
take the ground that the supreme court of the United States
ought to be required to hold court in each State, then he must
abandon the position as to any analogy between the cases. The
gentleman told them also, that the judges of this State had here-
tofore gone round; so they had, for the purpose of holding circuit
courts, and complaints innumerable had come up from the people
of improper decisions; everybody was tired of the system, and
thought that it ought to be abandoned. The people almost with
one acclaim, had said we want supreme judges. He believed
there was no instance, with the exception perhaps of the New
England States, with whose history in this respect, he was not
very familiar, of a supreme court holding its sittings in every cir-
cuit. In Missouri it was once tried, not holding them in every
circuit, but in four different places; but after some little experience
m this practice, they changed it and fixed the court permanently
at one place. Some regard he thought was due to the experience
of Missouri in this matter, and the practice which had prevailed
in all the States west of New England, was entitled to considera-
tion, rather than that of New England herself; for it would be
remembered that New England was densely populated, and that
the place at which the court was to be held might be reached in
one day's travel; and good libraries were to be found in every
county in the State. There was not the same reason then for
holding the court at one particular point, while every requisite
facility was afforded them at various places and where less travel
was required. Again, in relation to the convenience of the law-
yers, for he apprehended after all, that the object was to draw the

S04 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

practice from the supreme court into different hands; he agreed
with the gentleman from White, that there ought to be free trade
in this matter as in other things, and however it might seem to
savor of a disposition to please the popular taste, to which he
would never pander, he must be permitted to say, that it was not
only necessary to have experienced judges, but it was also necessary
to have able lawyers on the circuit. It was not equally important
he admitted, to have able lawyers, as to have able and upright
judges; but it was highly necessary to have able lawyers, and if
the single result of keeping pettyfogging lawyers out of the prac-
tice and could be attained, it would redound to the credit of the
people of the State. But it was said that a lawyer coming from
a remote part of the State, had to remain a long time waiting
before they could get the ear of the court. It might be so with
those little lawyers who came with little cases, but it was not so
with those who came with a reputation, and whose briefs made it
worth while for the court to attend to them. If a lawyer prepared
his case as he should do, though there might be some delay, there
would not be sufficient to justify complaint.

He was prepared to meet gentlemen on middle ground in regard
to this matter. He was prepared to agree that the legislature
should have power to fix places for holding the supreme court
hereafter, when experience showed that there was necessity for
change. Howmany circuits were there to be? One report recom-
mended twenty, and another twelve. Gentlemen might say what
they pleased, it was well known that carrying the court into every
circuit would greatly increase litigation. He did not say that it
would increase the number of original cases; but it would increase
the number of appeals. Every case that was susceptible of appeal
would be carried into the supreme court, and its business would
be greatly and unnecessarily increased. Three places, then, he
thought, would afford ample opportunity for conducting with
advantage the business of the supreme court.

He had been the more solicitous in regard to this matter, be-
cause he knew that there was something pleasing in the idea of
having justice carried to every man's door, and the advantages of hav-
ing the court permanently fixed in one place, were apt to be over-
looked. There was another reason why he felt apprehensive

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 505

about this amendment. They were divided concerning this
system of establishing the supreme court into three parties. One
set of gentlemen were desirous of having three divisions of the
State; another set desired to have the judges elected by general
ticket; and another, wishing to have the judges elected by districts,
and not appointed by the Governor, and each were unwilling to
perfect the other system; consequently they had to fight first
against the enemies of the system, and then against those who
were allured with the idea of carrying home justice to every man's
door. It was for this reason that he felt a solicitude for the fate
of the amendment, involving, as it did, all that was valuable in the
supreme court.

Mr. KNOX said he rose to make a single suggestion in regard
to a matter which he believed had not been adverted to. This
committee had decided that the supreme court should consist of
but three judges. The proposition contained in the report of the
majority of the judiciary committee which it was proposed to
strike out was, that ' 'one term of the supreme court shall be held
annually in each judicial circuit,' ' and the report went on to pro-
vide "that there shall be twelve judicial circuits, which may be
increased from time to time," &c., and the minority report pro-
vided that there shall be twenty judicial districts. It would
therefore be necessary for the three justices of the supreme court,
if this section should be retained, to hold their courts in all these
different circuits, and it was admitted on both sides of the house,
that if the terms of the court were held in these different judicial
circuits, the business of the court would be materially increased.
The gentleman from St. Clair in his argument yesterday, took the
ground that it was necessary that the court should be holden in
the several districts to give the lawyers of those districts an oppor-
tunity to conduct their cases, which they would not be able to do
if the court was held at one place for the whole State. The whole
tenor of the arguments on that side went to convince him that,
under the circuit system there would be great increase of litiga-
tion. The great and moving cause for calling the convention of
the State of New York was, that the courts that existed in that
State were entirely incompetent to dispose of all the business
before them. Twelve years ago the supreme court of the State

5o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of New York was at least two years behind in disposing of the
business which was already before them; and it was a subject of
complaint, that suitors in a supreme court were not able to have
justice done them, and many suits were not carried on which would
have been provided it had been able to dispose of its business;
and gendemen of the bar would understand him when he said,
that the crowded state of the business at that time gave occasion
for voluminous and interesting reports, to which, if gentlemen
would refer, they would find a rich vein of judicial decisions, for
which they might look in vain to the records of subsequent times.

If they would look back then to the reason for calling the State
Convention of New York, which was to change their judicial
system, it might give them some reason to fear that with three
judges, and no power to increase their number, whose duty it
should be to perambulate the State and hold courts in twenty
districts, they would be unable to discharge the duties that would
be assigned them, and to investigate and decide upon all the im-
portant matters that would be brought before them. It was for
this additional reason, with others which had been already assigned
by gentlemen in this discussion, that he was in favor of striking
out the sixth section of the majority report. If it were necessary
to provide for holding courts in all these circuits, then it would be
the duty of the convention to provide for increasing the number
of judges of the court; otherwise it would not be many years
before it would be necessary for a convention again to be called
for the purpose of remedying the evil which would necessarily
attend such an arrangement.

The question being taken on striking out the 6th section, it
was upon a division, decided in the negative. — Ayes 58, nays 60.

Mr. ECCLES offered a proviso to the 6th section, giving the
legislature power to change the place of holding said courts from
the circuits to the seat of government, or to one point in each
grand division as heretofore provided for, and said change not to
be oftener than once in six years.

Mr. ECCLES said, that the object of his amendment was,
that if upon a trial of the operation of holding the supreme court
in each judicial circuit, it was found not to work well, there should
be vested in the legislature the power either to bring it back

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 5°?

to the seat of government, or if it were thougiit more advisable,
more advantageous to the interests of the people, to establish one
in each of the grand divisions of the State. Upon the face of the
proposition it seemed to promise that it would work well to estab-
lish a supreme court in each judicial circuit; but it must be remem-
bered that the system was as yet, an untried one in this State;
and it must also be remembered that our judicial system had
hitherto worked badly in every phase in which it had been tried.
This would be an entirely new experiment, we were not only going
to elect our judges, although a large portion of the convention
did not think it would work well; (he for one did) and they were
establishing a rotary court also. He was in favor then of provid-
ing in the constitution that the supreme court should be held in
each judicial circuit; and for providing also, that if it were found
not to work well, they might retrace their steps so far as to locate
the court at one point, in each grand division of the State at least.
He thought this would accomplish the purpose which the gentle-
man from Gallatin desired.

Mr. KITCHELL said, he agreed with the gentlemen from
Fayette in the opinion, that it was not desirable to fix this matter
unchangeably in the constitution.

He was in favor of holding the supreme court in each judicial
circuit, because he thought it would tend to the greater accom-
modation of the people. He thought it would be well, however,
to provide that the legislature might hereafter, if it were found
necessary, re-arrange this matter. He offered an amendment for
that purpose.

Mr. CALDWELL offered a substitute for the amendment,
providing that the terms of the supreme court should be held as
directed by law.

Mr. CALDWELL briefly addressed the committee. He was
desirous he said, that justice should be brought as near as possible
to every man's door, and that could only be done by having a
greater number of judicial circuits than we had heretofore had.
Anyone who was familiar with our judicial system up to the pres-
ent time, must be aware that the circuits were too large. For
the purpose of bringing the courts nearer to the people, and of
increasing their consequence and usefulness, he was in favor of

So8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the number of judicial circuits proposed in the minority report.
It was circuit courts that were required for the convenience of the
people. The supreme court was of less importance to them.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess was in favor of having four
judicial circuits in the State, and five judges; and he trusted that
the effort to accomplish this object hereafter might not be un-
successful. With regard to the present amendment, he was in
favor of it with one exception. He believed it would give to the
legislature power of creating one supreme court to be held at the
seat of government. He was against reposing this power upon the
legislature at any time, and he was equally opposed to restricting
the legislature unqualifiedly to the circuit system. He did not
wish to tie up the hands of succeeding legislatures. If the circuit
system should prove itself inadequate for the purpose for which it
was intended; if, instead of facilitating the administration of justice,
it proved oppressive to the people, he desired that the legislature
should have power to change the system as time and experience
might dictate.

Mr. GREGG said, it seemed to him that it would be wrong in
this convention to undertake to judge as to what would be the
proper system for all future time. They could not possibly know
whether the particular system which they might be disposed to
adopt, would work well or not. He was willing to trust somewhat
to the legislature in the management of this matter. He thought
they might safely confide in the discretion of the representatives
of the people to make such alterations hereafter as the public
good might require. ^

Mr. HARVEY moved a substitute for Mr. Eccles' provision,
which was rejected.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair moved the following amendment:

But the legislature may change the time and place of holding
the supreme court, provided that it is not held in less than five
places in the State; such change, however, not to be made oftener
than once in six years.

Mr. KINNEY observed, that if the system should not be found
to work well, the proper time for alteration to be made by the
legislature would be at the time of the election of judges; and
he thought that the substitute which he offered would meet the

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 509

approbation of those who had expressed themselves in favor of a
smaller number of circuits for the supreme court. He believed
that almost every gentleman who had addressed the committee
was in favor of having the supreme court held in every district in
the State, but they were opposed to having this matter fixed so
that it could not be changed in case the system was found to work
badly. The amendment which he had proposed would obviate
this objection; and if at any future period after the experiment
had been made, it should be found that this system did not satisfy
with the wants of the people, it might be changed by the legis-
lature. He thought that five places for holding the supreme court
would be few enough; it would bring that court nearer to the peo-
ple than if it were confined to three judicial circuits, and would
be infinitely preferable to confining the court to a central posi-
tion at the seat of government.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said he had sat patiently waiting
in expectation that the committee would take some action upon
this part of the report, but he could see but little prospect of
coming to a decision, for if one amendment had been oflfered, he
believed there had been fifty, and he had come to the conclusion
which some gentlemen in the convention who were older than
himself had arrived at some days ago, that the deliberations of
this convention would never lead to any good result. They
had sat for two months, and had now before them the most im-
portant report that had been, or would be made by a committee,
and after being engaged upon it for several days, they were as
far from being through with it as when they commenced. There
seemed a manifest disposition to evade by a multitude of amend-
ments and long speeches the adoption of any part of the report as
it stood. The report did not seem to meet the concurrence of
any two members of the convention; indeed, he believed that it
had not been concurred in by more than two members of the
committee from which it was reported. I believe, continued Mr.
Davis, that I understood you, sir, [Mr. Scates being in the chair,]
as saying that you did not endorse the report itself. Sir, I am
in favor of the report of the minority, because, that has at least
the concurrence of two members of committee. I believe that a
proposition ought yet to be made to refer the whole matter to some

5IO ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

gentlemen of age and experience, I care not whether they are
lawyers or farmers, that they may bring in such a report as will
be a basis for our action, and then we shall be able to proceed with
some sort of order and regularity; but I cannot content myself to
sit here and see the convention fruitlessly endeavoring to put the
present report into such a shape that they may all agree upon it.
The people do not expect that in connection with making the
judges elective, we shall set about tearing up all the fundamental
principles of the judiciary department. For one, I heartily pro-
test against the proceedings. I shall not make the motion for
reference myself; but I do hope that we shall now pause and refer
the matter to a competent committee, who may report something
for our action, without wasting any more time.

Mr. BALLINGALL observed that as a member of the com-
mittee on the judiciary, it was within his own knowledge that the
report did receive the concurrence of a majority of that com-
mittee.

Mr. DAVIS remarked, that he had not understood the chair-
man of the committee as saying that a majority had concurred;
if they had, it seemed to him that they ought to be able to advance
such reasons for the provisions embraced in the report as would
satisfy the committee of the whole.

The question being about to be put,

Mr. WEAD said he hoped the Convention was not going to
decide upon the number of circuits without a more full discussion
and interchange of opinion. Mr. Wead proceeded to comment
upon the propositions contained in the reports of the majority
and minority of the committee on the judiciary in relation to the
number of circuits. No subject, he said, which had come before
the judiciary committee had been discussed more at length than
the question of dividing the State into judicial circuits for the
purpose of holding the supreme court. He had no desire to advo-
cate one particular system to the exclusion of another, but from
the discussion which had taken place before the judiciary com-
mittee, he had come to the conclusion that the way in which they
could best meet the wishes of the people of the State, was to
divide it into twenty judicial circuits at least. He had been at
first in favor of dividing the State into twelve circuits, and for

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 5"

establishing a county court for the transaction of probate business;
but reflection, the discussion which was elicited in committee, and
the long array of facts which was presented had satisfied him of
the impracticability of that system; and he believed that if gentle-
men would give their attention to the subject, they would arrive
at the same conclusion.

Mr. WEAD proceeded at considerable length to advocate the
proposition contained in the report of the minority of the com-
mittee.

On motion of Mr. Edwards, of Madison, the committee rose
and reported back the reports, with sundry amendments and
asked the concurrence of the convention therein.

Mr. EDWARDS moved that the whole subject be referred to
a select committee of one from each judicial circuit.

Mr. MINSHALL moved to amend by making it two from
each judicial circuit.

Mr. ROUNTREE moved to amend by making it three from
each judicial circuit.

Mr. Z. CASEY said he should vote in favor of the motion of
the gentleman from Madison, and trusted that it would prevail.

Mr. BALLINGALL opposed the motion. There was nothing
remarkable, he thought, in the action of the committee. Nothing
was more common than that a variety of amendments should
be proposed. There was a majority of the committee on the
judiciary in favor of the adoption of the amendment of the gentle-
man from Fayette to the report of that committee. Because the
committee of the whole had thought proper to differ in some
points from the majority of the committee on the judicary, was
this a sufficient reason for appointing a special committee? The
business would not be accelerated by it. If, as had been said, the
gentleman from Fulton, had spoken to empty benches, that was
no reason why the order of business should be changed. He hoped
the committee would not arise; he thought it would be of no use
whatever to obtain another report, and to commence over again
the discussion upon it; it would be only jumping out of the frying
pan into the fire.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison said he thought that every
member of the convention must be satisfied that no good purpose

512 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

could be accomplished by pursuing the discussion of this subject
in the embarrassed situation in which the committee were now
placed. Every gentleman must perceive that they were consum-
ing time without the prospect of arriving at any definite conclusion.
He would move that the committee rise and report for the purpose
of referring the subject back to the judiciary committee or to a
select committee, so that a proposition might be reported upon
which they could act free from the confusion and embarrassment
in which they were now involved. Whilst the gentleman from
Fulton had been presenting to the committee views of the utmost
magnitude, gentlemen would observe that nearly every seat was
vacant, and little or no attention was bestowed upon one of the
most important questions that could be presented to them. He
moved that the committee rise and report.

Mr. SCATES opposed the reference.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey was in favor of the reference to a select
committee, and moved that the committee consist of nine instead
of twenty-seven.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison said he was indifferent as to the
number. He would have proposed a smaller number himself, for
he thought they would be more apt to concur readily. He would
accept the amendment of the gentleman from Jersey as a modi-
fication of his motion.

Mr. WEAD said that in his opinion nothing was to be gained
by a reference of this matter to a special committee; but if it were
referred, it ought to be to a committee consisting of a greater
number, because nine members would not give a fair representa-
tion of the State. The number proposed was entirely too small
to consider a subject of so much importance; a subject involving
so many conflicting interests. His impression was, that no good
would arise from its reference; the proper place for deciding this
matter was in committee of the whole.

Mr. MINSHALL was in favor of its reference to a select com-
mittee, but preferred that the committee should consist of a larger
number than nine, and less than twenty-seven. He suggested
eighteen as the proper number.

Mr. SERVANT was in favor of the reference to a select com-
mittee to be composed of two members from each judicial circuit.

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 513

and he trusted that those who were appointed on the committee
would frame their report in accordance with the views that had
been expressed by the committee of the whole.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery, was in favor of a reference to a
select committee of twenty-seven, and he had no doubt from the
discussion that had taken place, that the committee would be
enabled to make such a report as would meet with the approba-
tion of the committee of the whole.

Mr. Z. CASEY desired to suggest to the gentleman from Mont-
gomery, whether his views would not be as well carried out by the
appointment of a committee of nine members, as one of twenty-
seven ? He believed the present proposition was, that the commit-
tee should consist of nine; one from each judicial circuit. If this
proposition were adopted each circuit would be represented, and
all differences in the views of the members of the committee would
be more readily reconciled, than if the committee consisted of a
larger number.

Mr. KNOWLTON was in favor of the reference. The com-
mittee if appointed, he said, would, from the discussion that had
taken place, understand pretty nearly the prevailing sentiment of
the convention; and if they were willing to yield somewhat of
each man's peculiar ideas; to abandon somewhat of pride of opinion
in order to meet the wishes of the greater number; and to do that
which would best promote the interest of the State; he thought
they might easily agree upon a plan which would meet the con-
currence of the convention. He thought that a select committee
would best accomplish the desired object, and he was in favor of
making the committee a large one; because the report of a large
body would have so much more weight, that the convention would
the more readily harmonize upon it.]

Mr. EDWARDS moved that the whole subject be referred
to a select committee of one from each judicial district; which
amendment, after being amended so as to refer the subject to a
committee of three from each judicial district, was agreed to.

The following gentlemen were appointed the committee, under
the above motion.

Messrs. Edwards of Madison, Lockwood, Davis of Massac,

514 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Farwell, Wead, Caldwell, Williams, Minshall, Manly,
Spencer, Thompson, Ballingall, Henderson, Hoes, Evey,
Logan, Scates, Kinney of St. Clair, Harlan, Constable, Knapp
of Scott, Bosbyshell, Dement, Hurlbut and Kinney of
Bureau.

And the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

afternoon

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison offered certain articles proposed
to be inserted in the constitution, in relation to the state debt;
which were referred to the committee on Finance.

Mr. ARCHER moved the Convention resolve itself into com-
mittee of the whole on the report of the committee on the Organi-
zation of Departments; which motion was carried, and Mr. Z.
Casey took the chair. The report was taken up by sections.

Sec. I. There shall be chosen, by the qualified electors
throughout the state, an Auditor of Public Accounts, who shall
hold his office for the term of four years, and whose duties
shall be regulated by law, and who shall receive a salary of one
thousand dollars per annum for his services.

Mr. BUTLER moved to strike out $1,000, and insert $1,500;
which was rejected.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to add to the section: "ex-
clusive of clerk hire;" which was decided in the affirmative.

Mr. EVEY moved to strike out $1,000, and insert |8oo. Re-
jected.

Mr. JONES moved to add to the section: "and no more."
Carried.

Sec. 2. There shall be elected, by the qualified voters
throughout the state, a State Treasurer, who shall hold his office
for two years; whose duties may be regulated by law, and who
shall receive a salary of eight hundred dollars per annum.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to add to the section: "and no more;"
decided in the affirmative.

Mr. LOGAN moved to strike out $800, and insert $1,000 —
yeas 44, nays 64. Rejected.

Mr. KENNER moved to strike out two years, and insert
"four years." Rejected.

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 515

Mr. PETERS moved to insert after years: "and until his
successor is qualified." Carried.

Mr. CHURCH moved to add to the section: "exclusive of
clerk hire." Rejected.

Sections three and four, having been provided for in a former
report, were, on motion, stricken out.

On motion, the committee rose and reported back the article,
with the amendments, to the Convention.

The question being on concurring in the amendments, they
were concurred in.

Mr. PETERS moved to insert after "years" in the first sec-
tion: "and until his successor is qualified." Carried.

The question was put on the adoption of the two sections as
article of the constitution, and decided in the affirmative.

Mr. SCATES moved it be referred to the committee of Revi-
sion. Carried.

Mr. ROMAN moved the report of the committee on Elections
and Right of Suffrage be referred to the committee of the whole,
and that the Convention go into committee on that report; which
was decided in the affirmative, and Mr. Harvey was called to the
chair.

Sec. I. In all elections every white male citizen, above the
age of twenty-one years, having resided in the state one year next
preceding any election, shall be entitled to vote at such election;
and every white male inhabitant of the age aforesaid, who may be
a resident of this state at the time of the adoption of this constitu-
tion, shall have the right of voting as aforesaid; but no such
citizen or inhabitant shall be entitled to vote except in the district
or county in which he shall actually reside at the time of such
election.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out "citizen" in [the] first line
and insert "inhabitant."

Mr. S. said, that he made the motion because he was in favor
of admitting foreigners to the right of voting, provided they had,
like other voters, resided twelve months in the state, and made a
declaration of their intention to become citizens. He thought
that men who came to this country as an asylum from oppression,
and on account of a love for our institutions, should not be con-

5i6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

sidered in the light of spies, or as mischievous persons, who had
come here to operate dangerously with the privilege of voting.
We had had an experience of a similar law, and found no evil result-
ing from it. — We placed all foreigners under the same burdens of
citizens — we taxed them, we made them subservient to the laws,
and compelled them to work on the road and perform all other
duties of citizenship, and he saw no reason why we should deny
them the right of voting, or refuse them the privileges of freemen.
They made good citizens, and in the present war were found,
even the unnaturalized, to be ready and willing to battle for the
land of their choice. He thought the time proposed long enough
for the probationary term.

Mr. GEDDES replied, and thought the law of the United
States, requiring five years residence, a period not too long, and
that we ought to follow it.

The question was then taken on striking out, and decided in
the negative.

Mr. ROMAN moved to insert after "constitution:" "or who
has filed his declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the
United States, according to the laws thereof."

Mr. GEDDES moved to strike out "or," in the amendment,
and insert "and."

Mr. HAYES opposed the amendment to the amendment,
because it not only affected those who were to come into the
state, but also those who were here at present. He was in favor
of the amendment, and had voted for the amendment of the
gentleman from Jefferson, Mr. Scates.

Mr. BROCKMAN was in favor of the amendment, but opposed
to the amendment to it. He was willing that every man who
came to the state should enjoy the rights of freemen. He was
opposed to any distinctions among the people, and was willing to
admit all to equal rights.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that he hoped the ques-
tion would not be taken at this time. The Convention either
was in a rush or at a halt, and there seemed a disposition at present
to run away with the business without giving time for consider-
ation. The question now before them was one of great importance
to a large portion of the community, and particularly to the labor-

FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1847 5^7

ing classes. He asked those who desired this feature in the con-
stitution changed, to point out the abuses of which they com-
plained. He would ask them if it had retarded the progress of the
state? If it has thrown any obstacle in the way of a full develop-
ment of our resources? If any one would point out to him when
it had done this, then he would go with them in the change. Will
gentlemen tell him the ground of their complaints? He believed
them nothing but imaginary chimeras of the brain, or the result
of some party design. If he had time, and this question had not
been sprung upon them this afternoon, he would have been pre-
pared to enter more largely upon the subject, and would have
drawn a clause to be inserted in the constitution, which, he was
sure, would meet the views of a majority of the people of the state.
Mr. C. read what he said was the substance of his plan: To
require of every foreigner coming into the state, and desiring the
rights of citizenship, to take an oath of allegiance, and of his intention
to become a citizen, to be filed in a court of record; and, provided
he shall have been twelve months in the state, to be admitted to
all the privileges of citizens. He asked gentlemen to tell him if
men had the hardihood to leave the land of their fathers, the
scenes of their youth, their friends and acquaintances, to come to
a country of whose government and institutions they were ignorant
of? Could any man say that these foreigners tore themselves
from their native land and came to this country without some
previous knowledge and acquaintance with the form of govern-
ment under which they were about to place themselves? Was it
possible? He thought not. He would ask them to place them-
selves in the same position. If they were about to emigrate to a
foreign land and to leave the institutions under which they were
reared, would not their first thought be directed, and their most
anxious enquiries made, to obtain knowledge and information of
the system of government in the country they were about to select.
So with the foreigners. Those gentlemen who declare that foreign-
ers, after a two years' residence, are not qualified to be entitled
to exercise the right of voting say that which has no foundation
in fact, and they can base no such conclusion upon any thing con-
tained in the history of the last thirty years. One other thing:
we had an enormous debt, fast accumulating in interest, and which

51 8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

we were unable to pay. But it was to be paid — and how? Our
answer is, by the natural resources of the state. And how are they to
be developed ? Only by the hard hand of labor. How are our broad
untenanted prairies to be covered, and their fertility made pro-
ductive? By increase of population. We all admit that the natural
resources of Illinois are amply sufficient to pay all our debt; and all
then that is wanted is a development of them by labor, and labor
requires hands. Should we not then hold out to the world the
greatest inducement for men, particularly of the laboring classes,
to come amongst us, to till our prairies, to work in our mines, and to
develop the vast and inexhaustible resources of our state. We
cannot obtain this class of population without holding out to them
inducements equal to those of other states; and as we are burthened
with a debt, we should have those inducements greater than else-
where. For the same reason, he was opposed to a poll tax; he was
opposed to any restriction upon the right of suffrage, the force of
which would fall most heavily upon the working classes. Then he
desired, and it was our policy, to see [them] free and unrestrained in
the exercise of that privilege so dear to them. He would vote for the
amendment of Mr. Roman, unless gentlemen who complained of
the system as it stood, would point [out] to him, in the history of the
past thirty years, any evils resulting from it. He called upon them
to make some argument, to give some reason for the change, and
if they did not, he would never vote for it.

Messrs. Davis of Montgomery, Palmer of Macoupin, and
Green of Tazewell, all opposed the amendment.

Mr. GEDDES withdrew his amendment to the amendment.

Mr. HARDING renewed it.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair obtained the floor, but gave way
to a motion that the committee rise. The committee rose, and
the chairman reported progress.

Mr. GREGG offered a resolution that, in order to have the
hall cleaned, the carpets taken up, etc., and to enable the com-
mittee to finish the business before them, when the Convention
adjourned, it would adjourn till Monday. Carried.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

XXXVIII. MONDAY, JULY 26, 1847

The Convention met at 8 p. m.

Mr. HAYES moved that so much of the resolution presented
on the i6th inst., by Mr. Knapp, of Jersey, and passed on that day
by the Convention, which states that this Convention is unable to
protect itself or its officers from insult or indignity, be rescinded.
And, also, that the President be requested and authorized to make
arrangements for having the Convention opened each morning
with prayer. Which resolutions were passed.

Mr. SHERMAN presented a plan of restricted corporations
to be chartered by the Legislature, for various purposes, banking,
manufacturing, &c. Which he moved to be laid on the table and
printed.

Mr. BALLINGALL opposed the printing of any such plans.
Several members had their favorite schemes, and if one were pub-
lished why not extend the same courtesy to all. He would oppose
it as a bad precedent. The gentleman from Fayette, the gentle-
man from Grundy, and from Jo Daviess would also have an equal
right to have their propositions printed. If all were printed the
expense would be considerable and if one only was printed it would
be showing a want of equal courtesy, therefore, he would vote
against publishing any.

Mr. SHERMAN replied, that it would be impossible for the
members to fully understand the various propositions upon this
important subject unless they were laid before them. As to the
economy advocated by his colleague (Mr. Balungall) he thought
that it would be no saving of expense to refuse the printing,
because the time lost in reading them, when the question of banks
came before the Convention and the difficulty in amending, or
understanding them, would be a greater cost to the state than if
they were printed. He had no objections to the printing of the
other propositions.

Mr. DEMENT said a few words in favor of the printing.

519

520 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. WEST thought the printing of the proposition would be
the best course to follow.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess opposed the printing as un-
necessary, and as of no sort of benefit.

Mr. EDMONSON presented (in order to have printed with the
proposition of Mr. Sherman) a long system of banking restrictions
and provisos, and offered it as a substitute for the proposition of
Mr. Sherman.

Mr. ARMSTRONG presented a substitute for the substitute, a
proposition, (total prohibition of banks in the state,) which, if
any were to be published, he desired to be printed with the others.

Mr. McCALLEN said, that he had a substitute for the whole
of the propositions, which he desired to have published if any
were to be printed. He did not, however, desire to have any of
them printed. No person ever thought that a plan of a bank
coming from representatives of Cook county would be adopted.
He was a bank man, and desired to have established a bank which
would be of some benefit and advantage to the people of the state.
— He desired to have nothing to do with the bantlings that were
presented by the representatives from Cook county, who were
in favor of prohibition. — If they were to have a bank, he desired
to have such a one as would be proposed by the friends of the
institution. It appeared to him very strange that these prohibi-
tion men could not wait till the bank was proposed by its friends;
he thought it looked as if they feared they would have nothing of
the "odious banking system" to annihilate — or to adopt!

Mr. SHERMAN said, that he would say to the member from
Hardin, that, as one of the representatives from Cook, he was
no prohibitionist, that he never was in favor of the prohibitory
clause.

Mr. McCALLEN said, that his remarks were grounded upon
the course of one of the members from that county, (Mr. Gregg)
who made a speech some time ago in favor of prohibition, and
wound up by presenting a system of banking. After that exam-
ple, he thought that he was not wrong in supposing the gentleman
(Mr. S.) to be in favor of a prohibitory clause, although he might
present a plan for granting incorporations. He moved that the
whole subject be laid on the table till the ist of January, 1848.

MONDAY, JULY 26, 1847 521

Mr. BALLINGALL said, that as one of the representatives
from Cook he would say that he was in favor of a total prohi-
bition of banks. He was opposed to them for many reasons, but
particularly for the very good and all-sufficient reason that the
democratic convention that nominated him and the other dele-
gates, passed a resolution instructing them to vote J or a prohibitory
clause! This instruction he would obey.

The question was taken on the motion to lay on the table till
January, 1848, and decided in the affirmative.

Mr. ALLEN, from the committee on the Bill of Rights, to
whom had been referred the petition of sundry citizens of Winne-
bago county, praying the abolishment of all distinctions of color,
reported the same back, and asked to be discharged from the
further consideration of the subject. Granted.

THE CARPET

[In pursuance to the order of the Convention made on Friday
last, the carpet on the floor of the hall was taken up by the door-
keepers on Saturday, but unfortunately would not hold together
after the dust was shaken out. Consequently the door-keepers
reported that the same could not be replaced on the floor, so
shockingly torn was its condition. The noise made by the one
hundred and seventy persons in the hall, by moving upon the
uncovered floor, was so great that it was impossible to proceed
with the business.]

Mr. THOMAS stated that he desired to call the attention of
the house to the difficulty of proceeding with the business, while
the floor was uncovered and such noise prevailing. [Cries of
"louder" from all parts of the house.] Mr. T. repeated what he
had said, and urged, as the reporter understood him, that a new
carpet should be procured, as the old one was not fit to be replaced
— so torn and worn that it could not be put upon the floor again.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess suggested that the carpet
could not be obtained in Springfield. On a former occasion he
had tried here and in St. Louis but could not get sufficient of any
one kind to cover this hall.

Mr. THOMAS moved that the Convention adjourn till to-

522

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

morrow at 8 a. m., to enable the Secretary of State to provide a
new carpet, and then withdrew it.

Mr EDWARDS of Madison inquired how long it would take
to put down the carpet? Our adjournment should be regulated to
meet that contingency.

Mr. ROBBINS moved that when the Convention adjourn it
adjourn to meet in the Senate chamber; he thought that room
sufficient might be found there.

Mr. VANCE moved that the old carpet be replaced, no matter
what was its condition.

Mr. TURNBULL said, he had opposed the motion to take up
the carpet.

Mr. KNOWLTON said those who had voted to take up the
carpet should now turn to and put it down.

Mr. THOMAS renewed his motion to adjourn. He said that
it had been suggested to him that a committee be appointed to
examine and enquire into the condition of the old carpet, (laughter)
but he had no desire to make such a motion.

Mr. SINGLETON moved Mr. Thomas be appointed a com-
mittee to examine the old carpet and report its condition and its
probable utility for future service.

A Member proposed that the floor be covered with saw dust.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that it would take several
days to have a new carpet put down, and he hoped that the old
carpet would be replaced, it would prevent the noise to an extent
that would enable them to go on with the business.

A Member said, that this Convention has no authority to
purchase or order a new carpet.

Mr. THOMAS said, the Secretary of State was directed by
the law to furnish us what was necessary for our comfort and con-
venience, in the despatch of business.

Mr. PETERS said, that we should regulate our adjournment
according to the probabilities of having the carpet put down.
And (at the suggestion of Mr. Sharpe) he moved the door-keepers
address the Convention upon the condition of the old carpet.

After innumerable suggestions, motions, ideas, propositions
and recommendations, the following resolution was proposed by
Mr. Kinney of St. Clair, and adopted by the Convention:

MONDAY, JULY 26, 1847 5^3

Resolved, that the Secretary of State be, and he is hereby,
authorized to examine the old carpet, and if the same be not in a
fit condition to be replaced on the floor of this hall, then to pur-
chase a new one for the same. And the door-keepers are author-
ized to employ additional hands to aid them in putting the same
down.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

XXXIX. TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847

Mr. DUMMER presented a petition of sundry citizens of Cass
county, praying tiie appointment of a superintendent of com-
mon schools. Referred to the committee of Education.

No quorum appearing, the Convention was called; and then
resolved itself into committee of the whole on the report of the
committee on Elections and Right of Suffrage.

The question pending was on the amendment to the first
section proposed by Mr. Roman. Mr. Roman modified his amend-
ment as follows:

Insert, after "constitution," the following: "And all free
white male inhabitants of the age aforesaid, not being citizens of
the United States, who shall have resided in this state one year,
and shall have declared their intention to become citizens of the
United States by a declaration of that intention in conformity
with the laws of the United States: Provided, whenever Congress
shall dispense with a declaration of intention as a requisite to
naturalization, the declaration of intention required above shall
be made and filed in the office of the clerk of any court of record
in this state."

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair rose and said, that it was not his
intention to take up much of the time of this committee in dis-
cussing this question, but it was one on which he desired to express
his views, and would do so briefly. The question was the right
of suffrage — and whether we should restrict it in our state, and
depart from the rule laid down by the wise framers of our present
constitution, or adhere to that rule and secure that right in an
unrestricted form. The member from Macoupin (Mr. Palmer)
has told us that, if we extended the right of suffrage to the un-
naturalized foreigners, we violate the constitution of the United
States, because that instrument secures to Congress the right of
establishing a uniform naturalization law. That gentleman cer-
tainly has never examined the constitution upon this point if he
does not understand it or construe it correctly. The framers of the
524

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 525

constitution of the United States gave Congress the power to
pass uniform naturalization laws, not any power to control the
action of the states with regard to the exercise of the elective
franchise within its limits. Let that gentleman read on a little
further in the constitution and he will find that it says, "the
house of representatives shall be composed of members chosen,"
&c.; "and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications
requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the legis-
lature." Here the power to regulate the qualification of voters
is left to the states, and is not attempted to be defined by the con-
stitution. If the rules which should govern the right of suffrage
were stated in the constitution, as claimed by the interpretation
of the gentleman, then state sovereignty would sink into nothing.
Congress has the power to pass laws of naturalization, and the
states have it not; but Congress has no power to control the right
of suffrage in any state, or to define the prerequisite qualifica-
tions of its exercise. This the states alone possess.

Again: Is it our policy, as a state burdened with debt and
sparsely settled, to restrict the right of suffrage, and thus prevent
immigration to our soil? It has always been our policy to encour-
age it; the policy of the general government has been the same.
One of the great subjects of complaint urged against Great Britain
in the declaration of independence, was, that she restricted
emigration, that she denied the men of other climes the right to
expatriate themselves from their native lands, and from their
homes, to seek a shelter here, and to find in our then thinly settled
land a home. All of our state constitutions encourage immigra-
tion to their states, and the same spirit runs throughout the whole
land. The right to expatriate oneself, and to seek a home, has
always been contended for by the United States, and it was finally
tested in relation to our own people in the case of the settlement
of Texas by American citizens, who left their country and went
there and became citizens, and whom our government recognised
as citizens of that government. They could not deny the right of
men to go wherever they please, even to expatriate themselves.
We have the power to receive these men. We have the power to
prescribe what shall be the qualifications of voters for the members
of our General Assembly, and the men whom we entitle to vote

526 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

for members of our General Assembly are entitled, expressly under
the United States constitution, to vote for members of Congress.
We may have no power to make them citizens, but we have to
allow them the exercise of the elective franchise. It was, he
thought, our policy to encourage immigration by extending to
the immigrants the right of suffrage. They came to our state,
settled down upon our land, and we taxed them as much as our
citizens; we compelled them to bear the burdens of our govern-
ment, we made them do work on our roads, and perform all other
duties required of citizens. Why not, then, give them the right
of suffrage? Why deny them a voice in the election of their rulers
for the period of six years? This policy had been laid down by
the framers of the present constitution. They, too, thought that
immigration should be encouraged, that foreigners would flow
into our large state, if we allow them this right; they gave it to
them, and why should we now change that policy? They produce
the wealth of our state; they are principally the laboring classes.
It was the policy of our fathers to encourage immigration from
the east, and from foreign lands, in order to have our land inhab-
ited, and they extended inducements such as no other state had.
He thought that we should rather encourage them to come among
us, by throwing open to them all the privileges of civil liberty, and
above all the right of suffrage. We are here, a Convention met to
devise the best means of raising revenue to pay off our debt. To
do this, to relieve us from this evil, it is proposed to levy a poll tax,
showing that at present we have not in our state a sufficient
quantity of taxable property to raise revenue upon to meet our
expenses, or to pay the interest on our debt. Why deny, then, to
foreigners this great inducement to come and settle amongst us,
and increase the value of our waste lands, increase the population,
and lessen the burdens by which we are oppressed. Much has
been said about the character and ignorance of the foreign popu-
lation that come to our shores. He would refer the gentlemen
to the two great states of New York and Pennsylvania, both
settled by Germans, the latter nearly populated by them, and was
there anything in the character of their people dangerous to the
liberties of the people? They had always encouraged immigration
to their soil. Those states have grown, they have wealth, and

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 S^l

wield an immense influence, and are the most prudent in all their
acts. Yet neither of those states have, with few exceptions, the
vast and unexhaustible resources of Illinois. A gentleman had
complained that the paupers and criminals of Europe come to this
country, and therefore this restrictive policy should be followed.
Will they not come, no matter what the restrictions? Throw
around the right of suffrage all the restrictions they think proper,
and such people will come any how, you cannot prevent them from
coming here; but you will exclude those who will be of benefit and
advantage to the state, those who bring wealth, and who settle
down among us without any desire save to live here and enjoy
our institutions. Something had been said about the opinions of
celebrated men of the country in relation to foreigners. He
desired not to allude to it here, it would introduce party spirit, the
spirit of a party styled "Native American." He did not believe
there was any man in the Convention who would stand up and say
the doctrines of that party were right. If, however, the gentle-
man who had alluded to Washington, would look into the writings
of that great man, he would find that, instead of being a "Native
American," they will discover that his feelings, his sentiments, and
actions were very different from the doctrines taught by that
party.

Mr. TURNBULL said, that after a common sense view of
the matter by him, he had come to the conclusion that we had
no power to do anything in conflict with a law of Congress, passed
under a power vested in them by the constitution.

[Mr. TURNBULL said:" The important question before the
committee has not, in my opinion, been fairly met by gentlemen
opposed to the view contained in the report, and in favor of this
amendment. It is a principle founded on common sense, that, in
any society whatever, members alone have a right to a voice in
the management of the affairs of that society. This is true of
civil society, as well as of all others.

Gentlemen on the opposite side have taken the ground that
residence should entitle the alien to the right of suffrage. Sir,
in my opinion, citizen-ship, alone, can entitle a person to a vote.

*' This speech by Tumbull is taken from the Sangamo Journal, August 5.

528 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

By the Constitution of the United States, Congress has the
power to make a uniform rule of naturalization. The States
having delegated that power to Congress, and that body having
passed a naturalization law, we have no right to make a law on
that subject. The State has a right to fix the qualification of
voters on all other points; that is, to declare how long a person
who is a citizen of the United States, coming from another State,
shall reside in this State before he can vote. This State has not
required a property qualification, and I hope never will. This
question cannot turn on the length of residence; for, in an alien,
after living among us, and becoming acquainted with our institu-
tions; if he has lived, even in one county, five, ten, or even fifty
years, and at the end of that time is so opposed to our government
that he will not become naturalized, he can have no right to a vote.
To permit an alien to vote for Electors of President and Vice
President, and Congressman, is injustice to the other States of
this Union. Surely, gentlemen can discern between natural and
acquired rights. The State protects the alien in the enjoyment of
his natural rights; then, when he acquires citizenship, let him be
placed on the same footing with our native-born citizens.

The right to exercise the elective franchise is an inestimable
right. What boon, Mr. Chairman, would induce you to forego
this privilege? Sir, you can fix no price: — that right cannot be
valued. And shall we give away our dearest rights, to the alien?
No! Let him first qualify himself for this distinguished trust;
for, by any other name I cannot, in the present instance, call it.
Let him renounce his allegiance to the potentate from whose gov-
ernment he hails, and become a citizen. Then, and not till then,
let him enjoy the privileges of the native-born citizen.]

Mr. GREGG said, that it had been well remarked, that the
elective franchise, to be beneficial, must be exercised wisely, and
that when not exercised wisely, it becomes a curse, instead of a
blessing. From this he could not see the good sense or logic in the
argument which will bring us to the conclusion, that an alien
should reside in the country five years before he can exercise the
right'(of voting. We now say that six months shall be the term,
this is what the framers of our present constitution required to

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 529

enable aliens to exercise the right of suffrage. This same principle
of a short probationary term was recognized by the ordinance of
1787, established for the government ofthe north-western territory.
They were allowed to be represented and to vote for representatives
to the territorial legislature. The same provision was incorporated
into the territorial government of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois; and
this provision was made for the purpose of encouraging immigra
tion to the country. It gave them the right to choose their rulers.
In 1 8 12 the act establishing the territorial government of Illinois
was passed by Congress. Mr. G. read an extract from its provi-
sions. It was then not thought by the Congress who passed the
act, that it would be dangerous to the liberties of the country, to
give foreigners, after a residence of less than five years, the right
of exercising the elective franchise; and now when we propose the
same provision to be inserted in our constitution, we enter into
an argument upon the wisdom of the Congress who passed that
law, and who, in all their actions, were distinguished by their just
regard for the rights of man.

It has been said, that we have no power to confer this franchise
upon aliens; that the constitution has conferred upon Congress
the exclusive power of establishing naturalization laws, and the
gentleman from Macoupin bases upon this an argument that,
because the states have no power to pass naturalization laws,
therefore, she cannot confer the right of suffrage upon any but
citizens. The gentleman made an argument of some ability but of
more sophistry. It was a fallacy from beginning to the end.
It was based upon the ground that the elective franchise was an
incident of citizenship. Citizenship has other rights than this.
It is not one intended to be conferred by citizenship. In framing
the constitution, the exclusive power was left to the states to make
such, and whatever rules and regulations should govern the exer-
cise of the elective franchise. It is in the first section of the second
article of the constitution of the United States. (Mr. G. read the
section.) Does not this language show clearly that the states
have been left the power to control this franchise ? What are
electors of members of Congress? The same electors as the states
may admit to be electors for the most numerous branch of the
Legislature. Congress has attempted to fix no rule upon the

530 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

qualifications of voters for the Legislature in the several states.
Every state has different rules and requires different qualifications.
In one state a property qualification is required, in another citizen-
ship, in another residence, in other states other rules; and does any
man say that Congress has, or can, by any power given to it in
the constitution, enter into legislation for the internal affairs of a
state and limit by metes and bounds the rights and franchises of
her people, and say who shall vote for members of the Legislature?
No, sir, the states have ever been left with this power of regulating
the qualifications of the voters within her limits.

Mr. G. here read an extract from a paper in the Federalist —
by Mr. Madison.

Here, sir, is the language of Mr. Madison, the father of the
constitution, who says that the whole subject of the regulating of
qualification of voters has been left with the states, that they have
the whole power to prescribe the rules to govern the franchise, and
that their fiat settles the question. He says that Congress has
no right to interfere, and that the power has been wisely left with
the states. He therefore concluded that we have the power to
make whatever rules upon the subject of the right of suffrage, and
that we should not exercise that power to operate against the
rights of men, nor so that we should become illiberal and opressive.
We have now free suffrage, let us retain it. Do not let us follow
examples of other states who have bound up this inestimable
franchise by restrictions, until by lessening the right of suffrage,
they have lessened the liberty of their people, have lessened their
rights. The argument of the gentleman from Macoupin was
therefore a fallacy, if he (Mr. G.) was right in his construction,
which was supported by the words of Mr. Madison, the founder
of the constitution. He would refer the gentleman to the state of
Rhode Island, and the restrictions placed upon the right of suffrage
there. She was the most illiberal and unjust, in regard to human
rights, of all the states in the Union. There, the negro is elevated
above the white man, a negro, with the property qualification,
was placed above the alien, and through his political influence
could place his foot upon the neck of that alien, no matter how
learned, or talented the latter might be. We might follow the
example of this state, in placing restrictions upon the elective

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 531

franchise, but for one, he was not desirous of so doing. He was in
favor of encouraging immigration by having the exercise of the
right in the reach of all. Such had been our policy, and he asked,
would we now leave it to follow the examples, and to adopt the
maxims of illiberality, bigotry and prejudice, more becoming a
government of tyrants than of freemen. We want the population.
We want the labor. We want the men to till our soil, those who
will bring to our aid, the hard hand of labor to develop our
resources in their full beauty and proportion. And unless we do
so, these men from the adjoining states, and foreign lands, would
find elsewhere a home, where these privileges would be granted
them. Mr. G. pursued this subject at length. He alluded to our
mines, and the vast hidden and undeveloped riches of our state, and
asked how [we] would restrict immigration of labor to bring them
forth from their hiding places, and render them of service to our em-
barrassed state? He thought all such attempts should be frowned
down. When all our means of wealth could be developed, he
claimed for Illinois no second place in the Union, but first
in influence in the affairs of the nation. He could see no evils in
the past that called for this change. He could not see how our
liberties had been put in jeopardy during the past, nor how they
could be for the future. He challenged an instance of any foreign-
er by birth, who had been less patriotic than the natives, in the
cause of the state. He claimed the feeling of "love of their native
land" attributed to foreigners as a sacred, a holy, and an honorable
feeling, alike a pledge of their patriotism and their human feeling.
The man who had no such love was a traitor to the feelings of
humanity, and on his head should be branded the curse of Cain,
the unmitigated curse of humanity; all fellowship should be denied
him, and he compelled to associate with the brutes of creation.
He said the immigrants all made this country and her institutions
the subject of their thought and study in the domestic circle and
the family fireside, long before they left their native land. He
was not to be told that they tore themselves from their native
land, the graves of their fathers and the homes of their childhood,
to come among strangers to dwell, without first having obtained
knowledge of the character of the government under which they
were about to place themselves; nor that, after enjoying our

532 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

freedom, they would be found faithless to the land of their adop-
tion. All experience gave the lie to such a charge. They will
never falter in support of our country when they contrast it with
that they left behind them. Mr. G. then alluded to their services
in the army on the battle field; to their deeds as seamen in our
navy, who have aided in bearing the stars and stripes in triumph
over every sea. He denied that the founders of our constitu-
tion entertained any such opinion of distrust of foreigners. — They
had tried them; they knew their worth in the conflict of the
revolution; they made no distinction between men on account of
a difference of birth; their minds was [sic] as extensive as charity
itself, it included every country, clime, and creed. It had been
shown that their policy was, that this country should become the
asylum of the brave and the refuge of the oppressed. He alluded
glowingly to the many signers of the declaration of independence
who were men of foreign birth. The quotation from Washington's
farewell address in relation to foreign influence was made in
allusion to the attachment felt by our people towards France, and
it was against this he warned them. The name of Washington
was known and revered everywhere; it was the watchword of
liberty in the lips of freemen; the word that tyrants trembled to
hear. He had, during his administration, issued a proclamation,
setting a day for general thanksgiving to heaven for its many
blessings, and in it he said this country should forever be an asylum
for the oppressed of all nations, and the unfortunate of all climes.
A sentiment worthy of a patriot. This was a sufficient answer to
those who declare that he considered there was no virtue except
what was American. They were asked to place the term at five
years, because foreigners could not become, in a less time, acquainted
with our institutions; this he had answered already. The
intelligence of our immigrants is greatly underrated. He had
some acquaintance with them, and knew many of them person-
ally, and had generally found them more learned and more ac-
quainted with our institutions than they are represented to be,
and he ventured to say that if an equal number of them were
placed along side of a number of our natives, chosen indiscrimi-
nately, that they would not be found to be less acquainted with the
spirit of our government than the latter. The gentleman from

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 533

Tazewell supposes them as always ignorant. That member,
accustomed to all the bigotry of his native state, is as ignorant
of the character of the immigrants to our state, as he supposes
they are of our laws and institutions. Let him but study their
character a little more, and like an honorable man he will change
his opinions. Throw around the elective franchise all sorts of
restrictions — criminals and paupers will come to the country, shut
the doors upon every privilege, say that those who were born here
shall be the exclusive worshipers at the shrine of liberty — still
they will come and you cannot prevent them. He alluded to
the term of probation proposed by "Native Americans," twenty-
one years, and thought that those who contended for five years
should with consistency advocate the same doctrine; he spurned
the principles of such a party as unworthy of Americans, and said
they were advocated by men, who, in five times five years, could
not have as good a knowledge of our institutions as those immi-
grants, who come here to dwell, generally acquired in one year.
He advocated at length the policy which we have heretofore fol-
lowed— the encouragement, by offering them the greatest induce-
ments, to settle in this state. He saw no reason to depart from
it now and turn the tide of immigration to the neighboring states
who opened to them their lands, their privileges, and admitted
them on grounds of equality. He wanted not to let those states
say to the emigrant — "Avoid Illinois, there the bigotry and preju-
dice of the 'Native American' spirit burns, it shuts you out of all
the privileges and immunities that belong to freemen, and render[s]
you as men unworthy of trust or confidence, and deprive[s] you of
what every man should have — the right of suffrage. Come to us,
we will give you all these privileges." Will we permit this to be
said of us? The interests and future prospects of this state
depend on our answer. He would have the state increase upon
liberal principles. He would have the world say, as it does now,
to the immigrant in search of a home — "Go to Illinois — go to the
prairie state, where you will be taken by the hand of American
friendship, and welcomed to a full participation in the rights of
freemen, to which hospitality and liberality she already owes her
fast increasing wealth and prosperity." This is what Mr. G.
desired to have said of the state of Illinois.

534 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. GREENE of Tazewell replied to Mr. Gregg's attack
upon the state of Rhode Island. — He had lived there, was raised
there, and he wanted no information from any New Yorker of the
principles and condition of the people of that state. — That state
had never known trouble or difficulty until some of these New
Yorkers — one Mr. Slamm, and a ruffian from the penitentiary,
called Mike Walsh, came there to make laws for her people. — He
would ask them to go there and look at the peace and prosperity
of her people, at the well cultured farms and the spirit of industry
pervading the whole community, and then let them come and
tell us something of her condition. Mr. G. was opposed, as he
had expressed himself before, to extending the right of suffrage to
foreigners till they had become citizens. He repeated his views
of the majority of foreigners who came here to be ignorant, and
that none but such, and criminals and paupers, came here at all.
Those who were intelligent and industrious remained at home,
able to get along there without coming here.

Mr. BALLINGALL said, that he desired to say a few words
upon the question now before them, for he felt much interest
in its decision. He was not an American by birth, and hoped
that he would be pardoned if he detained the committee with some
remarks. He would have proposed an amendment similar to that
now pending, had he not been anticipated by the gentleman from
St. Clair. In setting out, he would ask gentlemen, how was it
that they denied the constitutionality of allowing foreigners to
vote before they became citizens, yet they all were willing that
those unnaturalized and who were in the state, should be allowed
that privilege? Had we not sworn to observe the constitution of
the United States, and if this were a violation of it in one case it
was also in the other. They might say that those who were here
had a vested interest; but let them not allow this to weigh down
their oath; let them not take their oath in one hand and the vested
interest in the other, and balance them. That same oath is taken
by every man who makes an oath of allegiance. It is agreed here
that they are foreigners who come here, who are criminals, and are
ignorant of our laws. Is this the fact generally? No. There may
be a few, and perhaps some may be found in Chicago, who do not
conduct themselves as well as they should, but is it general? He

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 535

thought that this oath of allegiance is not necessary, but it may be
proper to require it. It was also argued, that they should be here
five years, because they could not understand our institutions in a
less time. Another argument, and used in support of the charge
of ignorance, was that many came here who did not understand our
language. He was sorry to hear these objections. In the days
of the revolution, no such objections were urged against foreigners
by their forefathers, as he had heard to-day by their sons. In
that day, they extended to the Canadians, exclusively French, and
exclusively Roman Catholic, their arms for aid, and sought from
the people their assistance. — On the other hand, the British
Admiral applied to the Bishop of Quebec for men and arms, and
that prelate replied that the incitement of the people to strife and
warfare was not the business of the ministers of religion — an
example of christian feeling the gentleman from Tazewell might
well follow. In that day the forefathers of the country addressed
the people of Ireland — whom that gentleman is so particularly
opposed to — and asked them for support. (Mr. B. read an ex-
tract from the address.) Is this the same spirit which has been
shown here to-day, on this floor by Americans? — Those were the
"times that tried men's souls." In the winter of 1775 — remark-
able for its severity and the privations of the army — there
was a man from that country, who braved all its perils in the cause
of our country and fell before the walls of Quebec. Congress
sent to France for a monument to perpetuate his fame and mem-
ory.

Mr. B. then alluded to the services of Thomas Paine, who did
much to aid this country in her struggle.

He said he quoted these instances of foreigners rendering
service to our country, because he wished to show that the fathers
of the country asked no questions of those who come among them
as to their birthplace. He alluded to the several signers of the
declaration of independence who were foreigners, and particularly
to John Witherspoon, who, like himself, was from the land of
mountains and of flood. There was then no craven tongue come
forward and bid them stand back, that they could not sign that
instrument, because they drew their first breath in a foreign land.
If there were any such here, well might they hang their heads in

536 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

shame. He would call the attention of gentlemen, and particu-
larly those from Macoupin and Tazewell, to the seventh reason
given in the declaration of independence, why we took up arms
against Great Britain and George the Third: "He has endeavored
to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose ob-
structing the laws of naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass
others to encourage their migration hither," &c. These gentle-
men know that we have a state larger in territory than England
and Scotland together, and they seek to close the door against
immigration, by requiring that they shall become citizens before
they have a right to exercise the right of suffrage. They are doing
as did George the Third — when addressed — you are refusing to pass
laws to encourage immigration to our state. He would refer to
another instance, where a foreigner who was in the ranks of our
army in the days of the revolution seized a tory (an American)
who had been an enemy of his country, and hung him on the
leafless limb of a tree in the forest, the descendant of that man
(the foreigner) is a delegate upon this floor, [Mr. Campbell of
McDonough] and when the time comes will no doubt vote for
this amendment and say as he does so — "and this to your mem-
ory!"

Mr. B. then reviewed the same statutes referred to by Mr.
Gregg, and pointed out the several instances where Congress had
admitted, in the territories, unnaturalized foreigners to the right
of suffrage; and begged such of the legal gentlemen who differed
from him to examine the colonial statutes and they would find
that foreigners were then naturalized on very easy terms. Mr.
Madison, in commenting upon this subject says, that those
sections of the Union which had most encouraged immigration
have increased most rapidly in agriculture, wealth &c. Mr. B.
then read an extract from one of the letters of Mr. Van Buren, in
which that gentleman advocates the introduction of immigrants
as a wholesome restriction upon the rising aristocracy of the
people.

In i8i2 Congress passed a law entitled "An act to extend
the right of suffrage in the territory of Illinois," which pro-
vided that every free white male person who paid a tax and
had resided here one year should be entitled to vote, &c. The

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 537

men who passed that act took the same oath that we have, and
they did not think they violated the constitution of the United
States by giving to every one the right to vote, whether citizens
or not. In 18 18 Congress authorized the people of Illinois to
hold a convention to form a constitution, and prescribed the same
qualifications of voters for the members of that convention. In
1 8 19, that convention met, and they adopted the clause in our
present constitution, and which was adopted in conformity with
the spirit and policy of the times, and of the act of Congress of
1 8 12. That constitution was presented to Congress, and they,
by the act of 1819, declared that const[i]tution to be "repub-
lican." How, then, can gentlemen say that this amendment,
which is the same in principle with that constitution, is in violation
of the naturalization law of the United States? He regretted
that the gentleman from Macoupin, who has heretofore supported
some of the fundamental principles of democracy, has left us on
this subject, and he urged that gentleman to reflect, and perhaps
he might return. He regretted to hear that gentleman ask the
question, whether the Irish people, now starving and whose eyes
were turned to the world for bread, took time in their suffering to
study our institutions before they fled to us for life. The question
sounded harshly. He would answer the gentleman — that the
Irish people, when dying for food, when laboring under all the
privations and suffering of famine, when death was stalking
through the land and knocking at every door, this country was
ever uppermost in their thoughts, and cherished as first in their
heart of hearts! He thought the question a cruel one. As to the
charge of ignorance of our government because they could not
understand our language, he would merely say to the member from
Macoupin that he held in his hand a history of our country, written
by a learned and talented Italian, which had been approved and
endorsed by Mr. Jefferson; yet, if that author came here and
addressed this Convention in the most eloquent terms in his
native tongue, the member from Macoupin, because he could not
understand him, would say he was ignorant, and could know
nothing of our government. (Mr. B. read an extract from a letter
from the army detailing the death of a learned and most talented
man who had joined our army, and who was killed in a late battle,

538 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

and who spoke no English.) Tell him not that because a man
cannot speak our language, that therefore he is ignorant! Such
doctrine was the very essence of "Native Americanism." Mr. B.
read a letter published in a whig paper in Chicago, giving a
description of the wealth, prosperity, and increase of a Swedish
settlement in Henry county; and made some remarks upon the
exclusion of such immigrants from the state by those arbitrary
restrictions., He desired no conflict with the reverend member
from Tazewell. He was aged and had a holy calling, but when
he so far went out of the path of his duty as to connect unnecessarily
a large and most respectable portion of community with criminals
and paupers, his age would be no protection. He says that the
foreigners who come here are raised in ignorance of the institutions
of their own country and of this. He would mention to that
member the fact that an American, born in Massachusetts, named
John Copely, left his native land and by pandering to the pride
of Great Britain had risen to the office of Lord Chancellor of the
kingdom. When the question of Ireland and her wrongs came
before him, that man from his seat pronounced the Irish people
"aliens in blood, and aliens in religion," he dared not say they were
ignorant — the thunders of catholic emancipation taught him they
were intelligent. But the member from Tazewell outstrips that
English lord. He pronounces them aliens in blood and aliens in
understanding. He never thought, when he saw that member
kneeling at morning hour, praying for peace and harmony through-
out the state and in this Convention, that before the sun would
have gone down at eve he would rise here and pour out his venom
upon a class of our population, many of whom are vasdy his
superior. Mr. B. read numerous extracts from Native American
constitutions and petitions, and applied their doctrines to the
language of the reverend gentleman. He thought it was the
same doctrine of the alien and sedition laws. It might be said
that he — a foreigner by birth — should not have addressed the
committee on this subject; he would answer them as did another,
on a similar question. Mr. B. read the conclusion of a speech
made by Hon. R. D. Owen, when attacked, for opening the debate
on the tariff, as a foreigner. And concluded by stating that if the
reverend gentleman paid no regard to argument and reasonings of

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 539

his fellow men, perhaps he would to those of his God. He then
read from the Bible the following:

"And if a stranger sojourn with thee in the land, ye shall not
vex him. ,

"But the stranger that dwelleth with you, shall be unto you
as one born among you; and you shall love him as thyself; for ye
were strangers in the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God."

Mr. HURLBUT pleaded guilty to the charge of being an
American, but not to that of entertaining the narrow principles
of "Native Americans." He thought the cause of Native Ameri-
can associations was to be traced to such remarks as had fallen
from the lips of the gentleman, who had just sat down. He
reviewed the constitutional arguments of the gentleman, and
denied a precedent out of Illinois, where a man not a citizen was
entitled to vote. In the state of South Carolina the constitution
said "every free white man" — words more comprehensive than
even those in our constitution, and yet no one ever presumed that
any person could exercise the privilege but a citizen. He thought
the argument was used only by those to whom it was necessary
that the amendment should be adopted. He scorned the address-
ing of foreign voters as "IrishmSn," &c., and had told his people
he knew them not as such. But in other places it was different.
He would inquire of gentlemen if there were no frauds upon the
elective franchise on the line of the canal? If men had not been
run by wagon loads from Joliet to Chicago, and voting at every
poll on the road?

Mr. GREGG said, he never heard any such thing.

Mr. HURLBUT replied that he himself knew nothing of it;
he only had heard the representative in Congress from that dis-
trict (Wentworth) say so, and there were many others here who
had heard him say the same thing. He claimed that if foreigners
fought for us in the revolution, that there was a balance of account,
because it was they who fought against us. If the numbers
were weighed it would be found that the latter were largely in
the majority. He had never heard before of the sentiment
attributed to Mr. Van Buren, that had been mentioned by the
member from Cook. If that gentleman ever used the sentiment,
and it was known throughout the land, then he was not surprised

540 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

that the people had risen and hurled him out of office in '40, by such
an overwhelming vote. — He thought such a sentiment degrading.
He considered it impossible for any European to become acquaint-
ed with our institutions and government, without a long residence
here, and cited the many blunders made by the press and by men
in high stations in Europe in relation to our institutions, and
denied that the common people knew anything of our system of
government. Mr. H. occupied much time in answering several
arguments made by those who had preceded him in support
of the amendment, and closed by stating he would vote for the
section as reported by the committee."

Mr. BOSBYSHELL moved the committee rise, and the com-
mittee rose.

The Convention then adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole
and resumed the subject under consideration in the forenoon.

Mr. COLBY said, he, too, was an American, but if he was,
that would be no reason why he would deny to men not so by
birth, the same rights and privileges he enjoyed. He would
not take Rhode Island as his polar star. That state had a property
qualification, which was to him sufficiently odious without going
farther. Shall we take that state as a polar star where they
imprison a man for expressing his opinion? He thought not.
He had travelled in that state, but he had seen farms as well culti-
vated here as there. He denied the allegation that our foreign
population was the sweepings of the poor houses and prisons. He
had found among them men as intelligent as anywhere else. Mr.
C. replied to the remarks of Mr. Hurlbut and denied any knowl-
edge of frauds at elections on the canal line. He would vote for
the amendment.

Mr. THORNTON argued against the power of this state
to pass any law allowing foreigners the right of suffrage. He
thought such was unconstitutional and challenged a precedent in
the Union. In Ohio the constitution was in the same words as

"A longer account of Hurlbut 's speech may be found in the Sangamo
Journal, August 5.

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 541

ours, yet they have never interpreted it as we have. He would
vote against the amendment.

Mr. ARCHER had been induced from the continued com-
plaints of danger to be apprehended in case we allowed foreigners
this privilege, to look into the subject, and after giving it the
closest scrutiny could discover none. The history of the past
taught us no such thing. He agreed with those who had said no
danger was to be apprehended from men who sought a home and
refuge from oppression, or from those who loved the land of their
birth. He, too, argued that foreigners before they came here
made our institutions the object of their study, and were not so
ignorant as represented. He advocated the extension of this priv-
ilege as an inducement for them to bring to us their wealth and
their labor, and thought it was our best policy to encourage them
to come there, to develop the resources of the state. He took
up the constitutional question and argued. for some time in favor
of the power of the state to control the exercise and regulate
the qualifications necessary to the exercise of the right of suffrage.
He attributed the Native American associations not to such remarks
as had been made there, but to the spoils of office. Such was the
case in New York, where they held power but for one year. He
alluded to the many illustrious foreigners who had rendered
acknowledged services to the country, and closed by urging the
most extensive liberality to the people of the whole world. Mr. A.
spoke for nearly an hour, and we regret that we are precluded
from giving his remarks at length.

Mr. McCALLEN addressed the committee, in a speech of
more than an hour and a quarter, upon the subject, and touched
upon every imaginable point involved in the question. He dis-
cussed it constitutionally and politically; as a question of right
and wrong to the native citizen, and on grounds of expediency,
and finally as a party question. He replied to all who had pre-
ceded him, and anticipated those to follow. He read from several
documents, in his possession, opinions of the fore-fathers of the
country in opposition to foreigners, and finally took the ground
that they were not the most desirable population as citizens, and
not to be tolerated at all as voters, when unnaturalized. In the
course of his remarks, when alluding to the member from Cook,

542 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

he denounced the right of any man of foreign birth, who perhaps
had come here as a refugee from the insulted dignity of the laws
of his country, to teach Americans what was democracy.

Mr. BALLINGALL. Do you intend to say, sir, that I came
here from any such cause ?

Mr. McCALLEN. I said perhaps.

Mr. BALLINGALL. I then say to you, sir, that you are no
gentleman.

Mr. McCALLEN. I can take that. I can take that from
you, who have shown so much bravery as to attack an old gray-
headed man who cannot defend himself.

Mr. SCATES addressed the Convention in an argument
upon the constitutionality of the amendment, and was of opinion
that the states had a clear and unquestionable power to regulate
the elective franchise — a right expressly conferred by the first
section of the second article of the constitution. We regret our
limits will not allow its insertion.

Mr. WILLIAMS made a few remarks against the expediency
of the amendment.

And the committee rose, and the Convention adjourned.

[Mr. THORNTON said" he had not as yet participated in the
debate, and he did not now propose to do more than very briefly
to present a few of the reasons which would induce him to support
the report of the committee, and to oppose the amendment of the
gentleman from St. Clair.

Notwithstanding the trivial manner in which the constitutional
question had been treated, it did seem to him that there was a
constitutional question involved in the proposition. Among the
specific powers granted to Congress was this; that Congress shall
have power to pass a uniform law of naturalization. Some gentle-
men had contended that the second section of the first article of
the Constitution of the United States, which provides that the
electors in each State, for members of Congress, "shall have the
qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch
of the State legislature," deprives the National Legislature of

■"This account of the afternoon's debate is taken from the Sangamo
Journal, August 5.

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 543

all power, in fixing the qualifications of electors. According
to such a construction, it seemed to him that the power granted to
Congress, to pass an uniform law of naturalization, is a mere nul-
lity. Whatis the meaning of the term, Naturalization? It is the
investing an alien with the privileges of a native citizen. The
right of suffrage is one of the most inestimable privileges of the
free citizens of this country. It may be said to be his birth-right.
But, sir, it is not the birth-right of the alien. The power, then,
to pass a law of naturalization has been conferred upon, and exer-
cised by, Congress. There is no other authority in the country
to pass a similar law. If there was, there would be no uniformity
in this matter; there would be no safety to the country or its
institutions. Michigan or Maine might require only a residence
of one day, to entitle a man to vote; and thus, an influx of aliens
from Canada might determine the election of President of the
United States. The States, in their sovereign capacity, may
impose additional restrictions, upon the alien, to those imposed
by Congress; but they have not, and ought not to possess, the
power to prescribe any rule that would counteract and destroy
the effect and operation of a law of Congress passed under an
express grant of power.

But, sir, the alien, until he is naturalized, cannot be made
amenable to our laws. He cannot be tried for treason; — he cannot
be compelled to take up arms in defence of the country. Are
gentlemen willing to confer upon foreigners rights and privileges
superior to those enjoyed by native citizens? Do they wish the
foreigner to share in all the blessings of our government, when he
cannot be made to bear some of the burdens'^. Gentlemen may
say that the alien is prompted by as high and noble motives, and
by the same patriotism, to rally under the banner of the country
as the native citizen. Well, sir, admit that he enters into the
service with zeal; still, the fact is unquestionable that he cannot
be forced to take up arms in defense of the country, until he is
naturalized. Instances occurred during the last war with Great
Britain, of persons who had been resident in this country for
twenty or thirty years, and who were drafted to serve a short
campaign in defense of the country during the war, who refused
to serve — upon the ground that they were not citizens of the

544 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

country — and they were protected by the courts, and suffered
no penalty for their refusal. Is it right or just, towards our own
citizens, that you should permit foreigners to exercise the elective
franchise when you cannot make them amenable to the law?

There is a question of policy involved in this matter, which
would influence my mind in refusing to grant the privileges of
citizenship to a foreigner, until he had complied with the naturali-
zation laws of the country, even if there were no constitutional
barrier. What are the statistics of immigration? I notice, in
recent accounts, that there have landed, at New York alone,
between January and June of this year, eighty odd thousand immi-
grants; and this number will, probably, be doubled before the
close of the year! And how many are there that land at all the
other ports of the United States? The whole number who land
upon our shores, during a single year, cannot be less than four or
five hundred thousand. Are all these people to be turned loose
upon us, and permitted to enjoy the right of suflfrage — as they will
be, if this amendment prevails? Would not a residence of five
years — by enabling them to become somewhat acquainted with
our institutions — fit them a little more to exercise the right of
suffrage properly?

The gentleman from Cook referred eloquently to that feeling
which is implanted in the breast of every man: that love for the
place of his nativity, which every man, who is not recreant to the
noblest feelings of our nature, possesses. This allusion is entirely
against the proposition which the gentleman advocated. For
the very reason that such a feeling does exist, I am in favor of
prohibiting foreigners from enjoying the right of suffrage until
they have lost, by a residence here, some of that preference for the
land of their nativity, — until they have become somewhat acquaint-
ed with, and attached to, our peculiar form of government. And,
sir, I would ask, if all of those 4 or 500,000 immigrants, who are
annually brought to this country, are imbued with feelings of love
for the country of their adoption — are they actuated by those
noble and exalted motives, in coming here, which gentlemen have
attributed to them? No man feels a higher pleasure, a greater
veneration, for the names of Lafayette and those other gallant
spirits who participated in the Revolutionary struggle. And

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 545

there are foreigners now in this country who came here for the
purpose of making it their home — their asylum from oppression;
but these feelings do not operate on all who are cast upon us. I
recollect a remark that was made by a distinguished Peer in the
British Parliament, a few years ago. He recommended to turn
loose upon us, from the prisons of Europe, a swarm of felons, for
the purpose of undermining our free institutions; as he regarded
it as utterly hopeless to attempt to subvert them in any other way.
Sir, aliens are not influenced, in coming here, by those pure feel-
ings of love for the institutions of this country which have been
attributed to them. I do not, I cannot, believe that the foreign-
ers who come here — many of them, at least — are induced to come
from the exercise of a deliberate choice, or from motives of attach-
ment to this country. The native American, it is stated by gentle-
men, is here merely "by accident!' ' There is, to my mind, a double
meaning in this expression. The foreigner, has patriotism to
animate him, while the American is merely here by accident.
The American, then, is not influenced by that pure and exalted
love of country which the foreigner feels! I really cannot harbor
such a sentiment as this; a sentiment, abhorrent to every native
citizen.

[Mr, GREGG. If the gentleman imputes to me such a senti-
ment, he is entirely mistaken. I do not deny that the native
American is influenced by patriotism. I attribute patriotism to
all alike.]

Mr. THORNTON: I do not refer to the gentleman. The
remark was made, I believe, by another gentleman from Cook,
that the American was here by accident. It was to this senti-
ment to which I was adverting. I cannot believe for a moment,
that all this large influx of foreign immigration is governed by such
feelings. I have seen too much of them in the large cities of the
Union, to believe this. I have as much respect for foreigners as
any man. I am as willing to welcome them here— as willing that
they should find a home and an asylum here, as any man; but I
am unwilling to pander to them. All that the foreigner can ask, all
that anyone can reasonably ask for him, is, that he shall be re-
quired to live a few years in this country, in order to lose some of
his attachment to the home of his birth, and take some slight

546 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

interest in our institutions, before he shall have a voice in the enact-
ment of laws, in the election of officers of government; before he
shall have the power to upturn, if you please, that republican
government under which we have lived for nearly a century.

Some gentlemen have alluded to the fact that foreigners are
taxed, and have contended that they should therefore be allowed
the right of suffrage. Now, I would ask the gentleman if females
and minors who have property, are not taxed, and whether they
are prepared, in carrying out their doctrine, to permit females
and minors to vote? I ask is this doctrine correct, that everyone
that is taxed should be allowed the right of suffrage? If so, you
must permit negroes to vote. But I protest against any such
doctrine. I do not believe that it has any bearing on this question.
We do not determine the principle of the right of suffrage in this
way. The gentleman again says that if we adopt the report of
the committee, and require aliens to be naturalized before they
shall be allowed to exercise the elective franchise, we require more
than is required by some of the adjoining States, and will prevent
immigration into this State. The constitution of Ohio has lan-
guage somewhat similar to that of our own, yet foreigners are
required to be naturalized before they are permitted to enjoy the
right of suffrage in that State. I do not, and cannot conceive, sir,
that we shall prevent an influx of population at all by restricting
the rights of suffrage in this way. Every State in the Union,
except Illinois and Ohio, has this restriction, and requires that
before a man is allowed to vote, he shall be a citizen of the United
States. If the restriction will have the effect of preventing immi-
gration now, why would it not have had that influence before?
Why are we to suppose that the action of this convention, in
reference to this question, will go across the ocean and have the
effect of preventing a good class of population from coming
amongst us, when the same restriction has existed in other States,
and has not had the effect of preventing immigration into those
States? Such assertions ought to have no weight in the decision
of this question. It is a question of vital importance; one which
we should determine without regard to party. And I do regret
to see the indication of so much party feeling in relation to it.
I represent on this floor a very strongly democratic county, and I

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 547

say here, that I do not know the solitary man in my county, either
native or of foreign birth, who is not willing to have this clause
in the constitution as reported by the committee. It is no party
question in my county. The people are unanimous in requiring
that those who come to this State after the adoption of this con-
stitution, shall be naturalized according to the laws of Congress,
before they shall enjoy the elective franchise. But gentlemen
ask, why not carry the restriction to those already in the States?
It should not be done for a very good reason, to my mind; because,
to restrict those who have been invited here under the existing
laws, would be a violation of an implied pledge to them that they
should be allowed to enjoy the privileges, which the laws as they
existed, at the time when they came into the State, afforded them.
I for one, however, have always believed that the enactment of
those laws was wrong, and that the construction given to the
constitution was wrong; but that construction having been given
to it, and those laws having been passed, it would be a violation
of a pledge to deprive them of a right which we have already
extended to them. For that reason I should be unwilling to
impose any restrictions upon those who are already in the State.
But I do hope that the report as it came from the committee will
be adopted, and that all aliens who come into the State hereafter,
will be required to comply with the naturalization laws of the
United States, before they are permitted to enjoy the right of
suffrage.

Mr. WOODSON gave notice that he would henceforth insist
upon the enforcement of the rule which had been adopted for
limiting the speeches to thirty minutes.

Mr. McCALLEN next addressed the committee, in opposition
to the amendment. He contended that the power had been
conferred upon Congress by the constitution of the United States,
to pass laws for the naturalization of foreigners, and that the several
States had no right to contravene those laws. He reviewed the
arguments of the gentleman who advocated the propriety of con-
ferring the privilege of exercising the elective franchise, without
a compliance with the requisitions of the laws of Congress, and
replied to them, contending for the necessity of adhering to the
terms of naturalization prescribed in that law. It had been

548 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

admitted that foreigners felt an attachment for the institutions
of the country of their nativity. Was it compatible with human
nature, he asked, that they should upon coming here, entertain
an attachment for the institutions of this country?— that they
should cherish two loves at the same time? He combated the
idea that foreigners could understand the institutions of this
country in a few months. It was too frequently the case that their
votes were thrown into the market, and purchased by the highest
bidder. It had been asserted by the gentleman from Brown, and
one of the gentlemen from Cook, that extending the privilege of
voting to foreigners, after six months residence, had been pro-
ductive of no bad results, and that the extension of these privi-
leges could not be productive of injury. He would refer them to
the scenes that had taken place at Philadelphia. What was it
that caused the blood of our citizens to flow for three days in that
city of brotherly love? Did it not proceed from fanaticism, such
as had been exhibited here to-day? Did it not proceed from the
encroachments which were being made by foreigners upon the
rights of American citizens?

Mr. GREGG. I ask the gentleman if religious bigotry had
not something to do with it?

Mr. McCALLEN. I ask you, sir, if fanaticism, such as has
been preached here to-day, had no more to do with it?

Mr. GREGG. I say no, in reply.

Mr. McCALLEN. And I say no, in reply to the gentleman's
enquiry.

It has been reserved, continued Mr. McCallen, for statesmen,
with such towering minds and magnanimous feelings as those of
the gentleman from Brown, and the gentleman from Cook, to
make this discovery.

Mr. McCALLEN proceeded to state instances of the improper
use made of the influence of party men over the votes of foreigners
employed on the public works. He himself had been threatened
with the destruction of his prospects in case he refused to pander to
the unholy appetite of political gamblers. He was no enemy
to foreigners. He was as friendly to their welfare as were those
who prated so much about their privileges. Every drop of blood
which flowed in his veins had its origin in the land of the thistle.

TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1847 549

and the land of the shamrock. But, (unfortunately for him
according to the gentleman's showing) those from whom he
descended emigrated to this country previous to the Revolution-
ary war. Some of the blood of his ancestors had watered the tree
of liberty. The gentleman from Cook was more fortunate in not
being born in America; he was fresh and verdant from the soil of
Europe.

Mr. GREGG. Does the gentleman allude to me?

Mr. McCALLEN. I allude to one of the gentlemen from
Cook.

Mr. GREGG. Does the gentleman mean me, when he speaks
of the gentleman from Cook?

Mr. McCALLEN. I mean Mr. Ballingall.

Mr. BALLINGALL. I ask the gentleman if he does not think
that thirteen years residence is not sufficient to give a man some
claim to citizenship?

Mr. McCALLEN. The gentleman may think for himself as
he pleases; but he must not think that because he was born in
Ireland or Scotland, he can come here and teach me what the
institutions of my country are! — that he can teach those who have
been born and nurtured upon the soil — those who have been
dandled on the lap of American mothers! Such men are not to
be taught patriotism, by those who are recently from a country
governed by despotism. I know not what the motives are that
brought them here — perhaps it was love for the institutions of the
country — perhaps they came here for bread — and perhaps the
gentleman himself may have come here as a refugee from the
insulted dignity of the laws of his country.

Mr. BALLINGALL. Does the gentleman mean to assert
that?

Mr. McCALLEN. I say, perhaps, sir.

Mr. BALLINGALL. I say to you, sir, that you are no gentle-
man!

Mr. McCALLEN. Well, sir, I can take that from a man who
has no feelings in common with Americans, and a man who has
no more bravery than to attack an old, venerable, gray-headed
gentleman, who, from his peculiar position in society cannot
defend himself.

550

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The CHAIRMAN [rapping the desk with his mallet]. The
thirty minutes have expired.

Cries of ' 'go on' '— ' 'go on' ' — ' 'go on' ' — from all sides.

Mr. BALLINGALL. This is a question of great magnitude.
Other gentlemen have spoken their hour, and I hope that no
gentleman will be so ungracious as to call for the enforcement of
the half hour rule. I hope the gentleman will be permitted to
proceed with his remarks.

Renewed cries of ' 'proceed' ' — ' 'proceed.' '

Mr. McCALLEN. I was remarking, sir, that it came with a
very bad grace from a mere stripling, a foreigner, to make an
attack upon, and ascribe motive to a venerable gentleman upon
this floor; to charge him with being actuated by motives of the
blackest and deepest corruption, when he knew that from his
position in society, he could not defend himself. I ask him if
there is anything gentlemanly in conduct like that? When such
aspersions were thrown out, I felt in duty bound to defend the
aged gentleman. I have now done.

It has been asserted here, by the gentleman from Cook, that a
large portion of the army, now battling in Mexico, are foreigners.
Does the gentleman know anything of the organization of the
regular army in time of peace? Is it motives of patriotism alone
which actuate men to enter the army? No man of energy or
character, or who is a very valuable citizen, will enlist. It is
chiefly those who desire to get a living without work. And how
have these foreigners conducted themselves? Why, sir, it is said
that they have deserted to the enemy by fifties and hundreds.

Mr. McCALLEN proceeded at considerable length to ani-
madvert upon the arguments of gentlemen on the opposite side.

On motion of Mr. Geddes the committee rose, reported pro-
gress, and had leave to sit again.

Convention adjourned.]

XL. WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Finley.

Leave of absence for eight days was granted to Messrs Bond,
Harding, Moore and Huston, and for fourteen days to Mr.
McHatton.

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole,
on [t]he report of the committee on Elections and Right of
Suffrage — Mr. Harvey in the chair.

Mr. ARMSTRONG said, that he was in favor of the amend-
ment proposed by the gentleman from St. Clair. This was a
question on which the two parties — democratic and whig — were
divided, and we were here ready to compromise. The democrats
wanted the provision as in the old constitution, and the whigs
wanted citizenship. The report of the committee was no com-
promise, it carried it up to the 5 years. The amendment was the
compromise. He was the representative of no party or faction,
he came from his county without opposition. But there were no
whigs there, who required the time to be extended to five
years. The people were big with vengeance at our protracted
session, and unless we were careful in what provisions we made,
our new constitution will never see day-light. The member from
Boone said that our representative in Congress told him that
wagon loads of foreigners were carried from poll to poll, and voted,
over and over, at one election. This is strange; no one who lives
in that region, ever heard of it. It either shows our member of
Congress has said in a joke what was not so, or, that he was a
fool in selecting a confident [sic] from the whig party, and the
gentleman from Boone in particular.

Mr. A. alluded warmly to the high character of the foreigners
who had settled in our state, and mentioned an incident that
occurred on the canal. A gentleman from this city came there,
and addressed the workmen upon political subjects for some time;
when he had finished, one of the men got up out of the canal,
mounted a wheelbarrow, and completely answered the gentleman
551

552 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

— who was none other than Col. Baker. He referred to the
many self announced patriotic virtues of the member from Hardin,
(Mr. McCallen,) and wondered that the people, who always
elevated virtue, had permitted them to remain in obscurity.
He asked if the mobs in Philadelphia, and in Massachusetts, were
the result of a six months' qualification? He thought we should
remember the Massac and Hancock affairs, before we spoke of
riots and bloodshed.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL then addressed the Convention at some
length. We are reluctantly compelled to condense his interesting
remarks. He advocated a liberal policy towards foreigners and
approved of the present system. He defended foreigners from
aspersions cast upon them and insisted that they were good,
industrious and useful citizens. He said that he was in favor of
coming as near as possible to universal suffrage. He would
allow native or naturalized citizens to vote within three months
after coming into the State, and he would allow foreigners to vote
within a year or two after declaring their intention to become
citizens.

Mr. PRATT said, he felt it incumbent upon him to place
himself in a position before the Convention, where the causes
which would govern his vote might not be misunderstood. He
understood the report of the committee to require a residence
of five years, and citizenship of the United States; he understood
the amendment to require a residence of one year, and an oath
of allegiance, and of intention to become a citizen. Both proposi-
tions recognize the necessity of restrictions. The question, then,
was merely one of time. He was unwilling that his democratic
friends should force him into a position of being acting with the
"Native Americans" — who desire to exclude foreigners entirely.
The principles of "Native Americans" exclude foreigners entirely,
and draw an invidious distinction between men, on account of an
accident of birth. He was unwilling to be forced into such a class
of persons, who hold this narrow-minded doctrine. The question
was then, one of time, for he admitted the power of the state to
regulate the exercise of the elective franchise. Time was essential
to a knowledge of our institutions, and the working of our govern-
ment. The longer that time, the greater the knowledge would

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 553

be; therefore, it was incumbent upon those who advocated
one year, to establish that that time is sufficient. It would appear,
from the view of the case, that the longer time would be the better,
yet no man had come forward before this Convention, to establish,
by facts and figures, or by a comparison of man with man, that one
year is as sufficient to acquire the necessary knowledge of our in-
stitutions, as five years would be. Now who are these foreigners ?
They who come here, may be divided into three classes: — The
first, those who come here with a hatred for a monarchy — and
such a form of government — a hatred for the despotisms of the old
world, and who left there in consequence of persecution. The
gentlemen from Cook and St. Clair are of this class; but they
are very few in number. The second class, are those who leave
their country to better their condition in a pecuniary manner,
and not for any love of liberty, or our government; men who would
as soon go to Asia as to come here, if the same facilities to wealth
were open to them. Scotch and Irish merchants, who, after
they have made a fortune, return to their native land. The third,
and most numerous class, are those who have at home, known
nothing but want and privations, and who have not the means of
subsistence. They come here to gain that subsistence, and they
are generally men of a lower social position, and of less education
than those of the other classes. Their purpose in coming
here is to gain a subsistence, and for the first two or three years
they have neither time nor inclination to learn American manners,
American principles, American laws and American institutions.
Yet it has been gravely argued that in one year they can and do
become acquainted with our constitution; and he asked if such
was not an absurdity on its face. — ^This admitting them to the
right of voting after one year's residence, gave them the power
to neutralize the votes of American citizens. Did it not degrade
an American citizen to give to an alien the power to neutralize his
vote? and that too, by men who exercise the privilege by guess
work. It had been asked where was the evil result in the past
history of the state, flowing from this provision. — He would answer
them in one case. We are in debt, the result of a ruinous and
extravagant speculation in internal improvements. That debt
has been increased by an obstinate continuance in them after the

554

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

people had decided against them. Large numbers of foreigners
had flowed into this state to work upon these improvements, and
their votes have been and are now always given for men pledged
to vote for a continuance of the canal, which is of no possible
benefit, except to these foreigners. — The Philadelphia riots had
been spoken of, and the destruction of property and of churches.
Who does not know that foreigners provoked these riots ? a party
of men — American citizens — had assembled together to petition
Congress for a repeal of the naturalization laws — a wrong policy —
but they had the right so to assemble. They were set upon, broken
in upon and interrupted by foreigners who were opposed to the
object of the meeting; and the first bloodshed was the result of
this execrable and detestable interference by the foreigners. The
Americans had a right to assemble, and on these foreigners who
attacked them rests the consequence of the bloodshed and violence
that ensued in that city.

The question now before them was one of mere expediency —
one of time. Ohio had three foreigners to one that we have,
and yet she has the same provision in her constitution that is
proposed by the committee. So with Indiana. In Wisconsin a
provision similar to this amendment had been inserted in the con-
stitution, and the people rejected it. He would ask gentlemen to
go to Europe, and into some country where the language spoken
was different from ours, and what means have the people there of
acquiring a knowledge of our institutions? And yet the majority
of the English, Irish, and German emigrants, without the natural
advantages of intuitively understanding our institutions, were
brought here and placed upon the same broad platform of equal
rights and privileges, and they were given the exercise of the right
of suffrage in common with American citizens. Was this right?
He had no confidence in this doctrine of intuitive knowledge. He
desired, by voting for five years, to benefit the foreigner and not
to injure him. He desired to make them become citizens, or we
would have the scenes again that we had witnessed two years ago
in Jo Daviess. He had seen men there who had been residents of
this state for years, and who had gone over to Iowa and asked
to exercise the right of suffrage, but they were refused because
they were not citizens. They enjoyed the right of voting here,

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 555

and had not thought of becoming citizens. It was said that the
tree of liberty had been planted here, and that its branches were
to extend over the world; this he did not oppose, but he wanted
guardians to be placed near it to protect it from abuses."

Mr. SHERMAN said, he was born in Connecticut where they
had a property qualification, and not being blessed with the
qualification, had felt the oppression of any restriction upon the
right of suffrage. He opposed any restriction; but if we were to
place any, he thought the term proposed by the amendment-
one year — fully sufficient. He would refer to the north part of the
state. It was their pride that it was fast filling up by immigrants,
the majority of whom were foreigners, and he asked, why not
encourage them to come on, to bring their money here and buy
our land? There was scarcely an immigrant coming into the
state who did not purchase a farm of from 40 to 200 acres, and
then commenced paying taxes upon it. The immigration this
year, he had been informed, was of the best kind. He alluded to
the patriotism of the foreigners, and stated the fact that four-fifths
of the two Chicago companies was composed of foreigners. He
denied the charges of fraud in the elective franchise by foreigners,
stated by the member from Boone, and informed the member from
Jo Daviess that they had uniformly voted against the "canal
ticket" on the line of that work.

Mr. BROCKMAN advocated, in a speech of considerable
length, the adoption of the amendment. — He repelled the various
charges of incompetency from ignorance, and want of patriotism
on the part of the foreign population. We have a full report of
Mr. B.'s remarks, but cannot insert them today.

Mr. DAVIS 0/ Massac said, this question had been fully
discussed, and he desired not to detain the committee. But as
he was chairman of the committee which had reported this section
he desired to express the reasons which had governed him in so
doing. There was a difference in opinion in the committee on
this subject. He was opposed to that portion of the report now
under discussion. There were six in favor of it and five opposed
to it. It was argued in committee, and they could not agree.

'"' A longer account of this speech by Pratt may be found in the Sangamo
Journal, August 12.

556 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

He was instructed to report it as it now stood. He did so because
he concurred in every other feature of the report, and looked for a
change of this provision when it should come before the Convention.
He did not think it necessary for him to argue that the states had
the power to control and regulate the exercise of the elective
franchise, that was too plain a proposition to require further
argument. He read from Story's Commentaries, and said that
the matter was settled. Mr. D. followed the question, with his
usual warmth, through all its points, and argued that it was right,
just and politic for the state of Illinois to adopt the amendment.

Mr. BUTLER discussed the question to a considerable length,
but our space will not permit us to report his speech. He placed
the matter home to the whigs, and showed that from that quarter
alone came the opposition to the right of foreigners having a voice
in our elections. He contended that the best interests of the
state should prompt us to give them the right of suffrage in the
shortest possible time, after filing their declaration to become
citizens, and that while we impose upon them the burdens of
government, we should not so far forget the dictates of justice and
the rights of man, as to refuse to extend to them its immunities and
privileges. That he considered this a party question. The whigs
had made it, and [he] was free to acknowledge that while he acted
upon principle, he acted as a party man in this respect. That he
belonged to a party which he took pride in saying was founded
upon principle, and it was impossible for him, or any other person
who belonged to a party that had any principles, to act otherwise
than as a party man to this extent, gentlemen's declarations to the
contrary notwithstanding.

Messrs. Turnbull and Davis of Montgomery followed in
opposition.

Mr. WHITESIDE ofltered, as an amendment to be added to
the amendment, the following; which was accepted by Mr.
Roman:

"And provided further, that if such inhabitant shall not
perfect citizenship according to the laws of the United States,
at the earliest practicable period after declaration of intention,
then the elective franchise shall cease until citizenship shall have
been perfected."

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 557

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess opposed the modification and
hoped that it would be withdrawn, because he did not see how
our constitution could be made so as to compel foreigners to perfect
their naturalization. The question properly before us is, shall we
admit them to the right of suffrage, or deny it. If we give them
the privilege, it is not competent for us, at the expiration of five
years, to say to them — you shall have this right no longer. He did
not intend, after his opening address a few days ago, to detain the
committee by making a speech. He regretted that those who
opposed the extension of this privilege had not come forward with
the reasons for this change in our policy, and for their silent vote
upon this question. The people desired argument and reasons
for this change, and will not be satisfied with a silent vote. We
want in our state an increase in our laboring population, and when
gentlemen refuse to give their reasons for their silent vote, by
which they cut off an inducement for that class to migrate here,
we must conclude that behind that silent vote is hid some secret
party intention. We want the men among us to do hard labor.
It is said that we have in ourselves the means of developing our
resources, and that to protect our own citizens we must exclude
the foreigners. There is no competition in labor. There is no
competition here for the privilege of laboring in our state.

It was unpleasant to him to be obliged to refer to the remarks
made by his colleague this morning. — He would merely state a
fact in relation to the opinions of that gentleman, before the
meeting of this Convention, which would not be denied, if it were,
it would be a denial of truth. Before the election we rode out
from Galena to a place called Vinegar Hill, where there were some
60 or 70 foreigners at work. After entering into conversation
with them upon the subjects that would come before the Conven-
tion, this subject of the right of suffrage came before us, and that
gentleman told them that he was in favor of foreigners, after a resi-
dence of one year, and a declaration of intention to become a citizen,
to be admitted to the exercise of the elective franchise. And the
good faith with which he carried out that pledge has been shown
here this morning.

Mr. C. said that he had challenged gentlemen to point out
the dangers to be apprehended from foreigners coming amongst

558 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

us. The member from Montgomery read to us some fragments
of a letter of Washington, found by him in the torn columns of a
contemptible "Native American" newspaper.

Mr. DAVIS said, it was none of the business of the gentleman
from what he read. Did he deny that it was a letter of Gen.
Washington ?

Mr. CAMPBELL admitted what was read might be the
letter of Washington, but it was garbled. It was said that the
devil always quoted scripture, and if he could do so, why not
that party quote isolated remarks of Washington and Jefferson,
and sustain the most contemptible doctrines? He hated the
very name of "Native American." Native American! He ab-
horred and despised the very name. Go to yon city in the east,
look at the lofty spires and towering domes erected to the honor
and glory of God, torn down, desecrated, and reduced to ashes —
and my coWe&gMt justifies this! God and his religion torn down and
trampled to the earth — and it meets with justification, and
from such a source! Mr. C. addressed the committee at much
length in support of the amendment, and upon the good character
of our foreign residents.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery replied, and passed an eulogy
upon the Illinois volunteers.

[Mr. DAVIS, of Massac said," it was necessary that he should
explain the position which he occupied in regard to the report.
The committee were divided, and although every effort was made
to produce a reconcilement of opinion, it was found utterly im-
possible for them to agree. The division on the report was five
to four, and he was finally instructed by the majority of the com-
mittee to make the report in the form in which it had been pre-
sented to the convention. It may be thought strange, pursued
Mr. Davis, that I have come in here with this report whilst I
entertain opinions adverse to it. There is but one single prop-
osition, however, involved in it, which does not meet my entire
and cordial approbation, and that is the proposition which has
elicited so much discussion, and which is now under consideration.

" This account of the speeches of Davis, Butler, Campbell, and others is
taken from the Sangamo Journal, August 12.

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 559

It has been contended that a State of this confederacy has no
right (in consequence of the power which has been conferred upon
the general government to estabhsh rules on the subject of natural-
ization,) to fix the qualification of electors. This is a proposition
which is so palably wrong as not in my opinion to need discussion;
but although it is clearly wrong, and has ever been so held, yet
I will enter very briefly into its discussion, and will produce
authority to sustain my position. It never has been pretended, I
believe, sir, that in consequence of conferring by the several States,
in the constitution of the United States, upon the Federal Govern-
ment the power to establish an uniform rule of naturalization,
that therefore a State has no right to fix the qualification of electors.
I will here read an authority in point. I read from Story's Com-
mentaries:

"There is no pretence to say, that the power in the national
"government can be used, so as to exclude any State from its
"share in the representation in Congress. Nor can it be said,
"with correctness, that Congress can, in any way, so alter the
"rights and qualifications of voters."

If this authority be correct, then, sir, there can be no doubt
as to the power of this convention to fix the qualification of
electors. There can be no doubt as to the power of this body to
say that an individual born in a foreign land, may come here and
exercise this important privilege; and to show that the position
occupied by the gentleman from Macoupin, and others on the
same side with him, is untenable, it is only necessary to advert to
the fact, that they are perfectly willing that all persons who may
be in Illinois at the time of the adoption of this constitution, may
exercise this important franchise. Now if it be a violation of the
constitution of the United States, to provide by constitutional
provision that foreigners coming to the country hereafter, may
exercise the elective franchise, notwithstanding they may not
have been naturalized, I say, if it be true that it would be a viola-
tion of the constitution, as has been contended by some gentlemen,
to allow such persons to vote, unless they have been natural-
ized under the law of congress; would it not be equally a violation
of the constitution of the United States to allow individuals to
vote who may be here at the time of the adoption of this constitu-

56o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

tion? If one proposition be true, it follows necessarily that the
other is also true; and if gentlemen will take this view, it seems to
me that they will at once renounce the arguments they have made
in regard to the power of the convention to fix the qualification
of electors, and that it will constitute in their opinion no serious
objection to persons coming into the country hereafter and declar-
ing their intention to become citizens, enjoying this important
privilege, notwithstanding they might not have been naturalized
according to the laws of the federal legislature. I before said
that it was useless, in my opinion, to enter into the discussion of
this constitutional question, upon which gentlemen have fallen
into a palpable error. The only question, in my judgment, which
should engage the attention of the committee, is whether or not it
will be proper for the convention to fix the qualification of voters
according to the mode proposed by the gentleman from St. Clair,
and in order to come to a conclusion upon this proposition, it
seems to me that it will be only necessary to ask the question, will
these persons be faithful in their allegiance to this government,
and capable of exercising intelligently the elective franchise? In
my opinion nothing more should be required as an evidence of
their attachment to our constitution and laws, than the solemn
declaration made in the presence of a court of record, of their
intention to become citizens of the United States, and a renuncia-
tion of all allegiance to the kingdom from which the emigrant may
come. Can there be a stronger evidence than the oath made in
open court, in the presence of the people and of his God, of the
intention of the party to become a citizen? Could there be a
stronger evidence, I say, of his sincerity? The mere lapse of
time could add nothing to the obligation which he would feel to
adhere strictly to the principles of the constitution, — to support
it, sustain it, to do everything that a good citizen should do. The
mere lapse of time, I repeat, can constitute no argument in favor
of the supposition that the party would be attached to the con-
stitution. The question then is, could he exercise the right of
voting intelligently? Is he in a condition to do so? Docs he
understand the constitution and the laws of the country? Is it
probable, sir, that an individual would take an oath to support
the constitution without understanding it? Is it probable that

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 561

an individual would renounce all his early associations — abandon
the land of his nativity — everything endeared to him by the
recollections of his youth, and declare his intention to support the
constitution and laws of the country of his adoption, unless he
had some idea of that constitution and of those laws under which
he was about to live? I know, sir, that it is important that every
man who may be called on to exercise the important privilege of
voting, should know something about the institutions of the
country, and should be capable of making a good selection when
he comes to vote for those who are to administer the government;
but we have no means in this republic of ours, of ascertaining
whether an individual is acquainted with the institutions of the
country, but such as are presented to us in the ordinary way.
We cannot know whether a man is qualified to do this or to do
that except by ordinary means. Now I apprehend, though I am
not very well acquainted with many foreigners, I apprehend that
most of them when bidding adieu to their homes, and launching
upon the broad bosom of the Atlantic to come to this country and
swell the current of freedom, are actuated by the best possible
motives; that they are anxiously bent on doing all they can to
make themselves freemen, and to assist in the promotion of the
great principles of human liberty. And is it to be assumed that
they are the most ignorant classes of Europe? I think not. It
is the intelligent; it is those who are capable of entering into the
most noble of enterprises, who leave their homes for the purpose
of finding a new home in the western world. The idle, the slothful,
and the ignorant will remain at home and bear the fetters and
shackles of the government under which they have been born; he
has no ambition to seek a home in another country, where he may
enjoy in a most eminent manner the benefits of a civil government,
that is built upon the true basis of human freedom. Hence it is
we find in the United States foreigners who have accumulated
immense fortunes; hence it is that we find foreigners who have
contributed to the great cause of human liberty; hence it is that
we find in the United States foreigners who have on all occasions
shown themselves ready and willing to bear arms and expose their
lives in the defence of the country. They are attached, ardently
attached, to the institutions of the country. They appreciate

562 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

them as highly as it is possible for any man to do. It is true, I
admit, that an individual may have a lingering fondness for the
particular institutions under which he was reared. It is true that
he may have a deep-seated love for the spot of his nativity. This
feeling has been well expressed by one who understood the feelings
of the human heart:

"Breathes there a man with soul so dead,
Who never to himself has said,

This is my own, my native land?"

It is impossible to eradicate from the mind this feeling of
attachment to the place of one's birth. But, although it is en-
deared to us by many fond recollections and pleasing reminis-
cences, yet it is equally true, that if we are endowed with minds,
we can divest ourselves of all attachment to that which is political
error. What was it that produced the original settlement of this
country? It was the oppression which prevailed in the old world.
The genius and intrepidity of the old world discovered and settled
this continent, and is it to be presumed that men who brought
to this country with them an ardent love for liberty, and an
unconquerable hatred of tyranny; is it to be presumed that their
descendants or the descendants of the same families in the old
world, have lost all idea of good government — are not now as
much attached to the idea of republicanism as they were then?
Why, it is a notorious fact, and that fact has been spread before
the world, by one of the most able writers of the present century,
that there is an unusual tendency throughout the whole civilized
world, to throw off the shackles of oppression, and to establish
liberal governments.

The gentleman from Macoupin thinks that something more is
necessary than a mere declaration of intention to become citizens.
Sir, if we were to require all citizens of our own happy country to
possess in an equal degree intelligence to exercise in an enlightened
manner the elective franchise, and to refuse its exercise to those
who fall short of this standard, I fear, sir, that many, very many
must be excluded.

It is not to be expected that every man should be acquainted
with the constitution of the country, so as to be able to write a
commentary upon it; but it is to be expected that every man will

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 563

be able to judge between a good and a bad government. It is
expected that everyone may be able to discern between a factious
tyranny and universal freedom. The idea that was expressed the
other day by the gentleman from Jo Daviess, and in which I con-
curred, that it was the interest of the State of Illinois to do all
that it can do, to invite immigration. The same policy that
governed the actions and deliberations of the Convention of this
State in 1818, should, in my judgment, govern the deliberations
of and action of this body. It was then thought desirable that
persons should be invited into the State, to settle its verdant prai-
ries and cultivate its acres. It is now no less desirable than then,
that they should be invited into this country, or at least that there
should be no obstacles thrown in the way of immigration. That
all who may desire to come into the State should have every proper
inducement held out to them to come here and take up their abode
among us. We have a soil capable of supporting a dense popula-
tion; we have a State peculiarly blessed by Heaven, and one
which in the progress of time is destined, in my humble opinion,
to stand unrivalled in this confederacy. We are at present under
the embarrassment arising from the existence of a large public
debt, and we all acknowledge it to be our bounden duty to adopt
every practicable means for the payment of that debt. We all
regard repudiation as a thing never to be tolerated by the citizens
of this State. We all agree that every energy should be exerted
for the speedy liquidation of that debt. If then by constitutional
provision, we place competition between the State of Illinois and
other adjacent States, is it not probable that our population will
not increase so rapidly as it would increase if we were to leave this
provision open; or at least to adopt the amendment of the gentle-
man from St. Clair? I think so, sir.

And again, sir, it is in my judgment a violation, and I express
it with great deference to the opinions of gentlemen who entertain
a different view of the question — it is a violation of the natural
right of every man to be represented when he is subject to be called
on to perform duty, let that duty be of what character it may.
Sir, all men derive immediately from their Creator the right to
govern themselves, and when a government is instituted by
yielding up a portion of the natural rights which belong to each

564 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

individual, then those natural rights which we derive immediately
from Heaven, are to be exercised by the delegates to whom we
have transferred the power of acting for us. It is wrong then, I say,
sir, for the reason that these persons are to be operated upon by
all the branches of the government, that they should, for a con-
siderable period of time be excluded from the enjoyment of those
privileges which belong to citizens. Is it apprehended that by
admitting these people to the enjoyment of this important right,
the institutions of the State will be endangered? It seems to me,
sir, that we should not abandon the principle that all men are to
have some participancy in the affairs of government, particularly
when they may be called upon to contribute to the support of that
government. These people, as I before said, are subject to pay
taxes, they are liable to be called on to perform road labor and
various other duties; and, sir, they, like your Shields and your
Baker, when the tocsin of war has sounded, rally to the field of
battle. Shall we say that such men shall not exercise the elective
franchise? Shall we say, by the formation of a constitution of
the State of Illinois, a State which has heretofore been character-
ized by a peculiar degree of liberality; shall we say that these men,
men of the same family of freemen as ourselves, men entertaining
the same principles, the same political views, the same ardent
attachment to freedom, are we to say that they shall not, for the
simple reason that they have not been naturalized according to
the laws of the United States, be entitled to enjoy those important
privileges? I trust that such a conclusion will not be arrived at
by this committee. There is no man who would more willingly
go for their exclusion than myself, if I could be convinced that
there could be any just apprehension of danger to the institutions
of the State, by permitting the exercise of the elective franchise
by foreigners. If I thought this, I would deny them the right,
but believing, as I do, from the little experience that I have had,
that there is probably little danger to be apprehended from this
source; I cannot believe that in view of the solemn oath to re-
nounce all allegiance to the government of the country from which
they came, and to support the constitution of the United States
and the constitution of Illinois, it is right to deny them the exer-
cise of this important privilege.

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 565

There has been in the course of the discussion a great deal of
feeling evinced, and I regret it, but it is natural that when gentle-
men become excited in debate, (and I am not myself exempt from
this error,) they unconsciously say that which they afterwards
regret. Some allusion has been made to certain gentlemen who
hold seats on the floor of this convention who have come from
foreign lands, and taken up their residence among us. Those
gentlemen, I have no doubt, are as ardently attached to our in-
stitutions as those of us who have had a hand in laying their
foundations, broad and ample. I regretted, sir, to see such a state
of feeling as this. I do not know what may have been the evils
the county of Jo Daviess may have experienced. I confessed in
the outset that I was not sufficiently acquainted with the foreign-
ers who are in the State to be able to judge of them; but the few
foreigners who are resident in the portion of the State in which
I live are, in my opinion, as ardently attached to the interests of
the country as any citizen in the State. They are as peaceful and
as industrious citizens as we have; they add as much to the active
industry of the State as any other citizens of equal number to
themselves. Shall we then prohibit these persons from enjoying
this important privilege, and thus induce them to go to a neighbor-
ing State where they can enjoy them?

The objection that has been urged by many gentlemen that
foreigners are not capable of understanding our institutions be-
cause they are unacquainted with our language, is certainly
entitled, I think, to very little weight. There are few of them who
do not speak our language, .those few are chiefly Germans and it
must be recollected that in Germany the whole people enjoy the
advantages of education to a greater extent than the people of
any other country on the habitable globe. Being educated and
intelligent, they have no great difficulty in making themselves
acquainted with the nature of our institutions, and they are in-
fluenced in a great degree by the same political notions, and by
the same ardent desire for liberty which characterize the American
people. Is it to be presumed, sir, that they will not after one
year's residence be capable of exercising the elective franchise?
I think not, sir. My own mind has been conducted to the con-
clusion, that they can after one year's residence exercise the privi-

566 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

lege intelligently, and under this conviction I shall vote for the
proposition of the gentleman from St. Clair.

Mr. BUTLER next addressed the committee. This subject,
said Mr. B., has been so fully and ably discussed, by gentlemen
who have preceded me in favor of the proposition before the
Convention, that there is little left for me to say, except to express
my cordial approbation of the amendment which has been pro-
posed by the gentleman from St. Clair. I conceive, sir, that the
report of the committee, which it is proposed to amend, will, if
adopted, deprive a large and respectable class of the citizens of
this State of their natural rights, and upon this point I fully con-
cur with the gentleman from Massac. I conceive it to be a natural
right, a right to participate in the government by which they are
governed, of which this report would deprive them. The report
proposes to make a very great change in our present constitution,^
a change which I believe to be uncalled for, a change which I
believe the people of this State do not ask for, and as far as my
knowledge is concerned, I can truly say, a change to which they
never will consent, a change to which they most strenuously object,
and that objection will be made manifest when the vote is to be
taken on the constitution. This class of people, sir, which this
provision will affect is in the section of the State in which I reside,
a numerous, and I may add, a very respectable class of the com-
munity. Now, sir, they will look upon a proposition of this kind
as unjust, unequal, and oppressive. They conceive that so long
as they are good citizens; so long as they obey the laws of the land
and properly demean themselves; and so long as the burthens of
the government are imposed upon them, they should have a right
to enjoy the privileges and immunities of that government, and
especially the privilege which the report of the committee seeks
to deprive them, which is so dear to us and will be to them. I
think, sir, we are purposing too many changes in this constitution,
and we shall bring down a strong opposition to its adoption, if
we proceed as we have commenced; — such an opposition, as I
think, will ensure its rejection by the people. Sir, I do not propose
to enter into a long discussion of this matter. It has been already
fully and ably discussed by gentlemen who are more competent
to do it justice than I am; and I should not have spoken upon the

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 567

subject had not the gentleman from Adams made the remarks
which he made last evening. That gentleman, as is usual with
the party to which he belongs, raised the cry of no party, and
alleged in his place that he knew of no party question having been
made in this State on this subject. Now I believe that it is per-
fectly notorious that such is not the case, and that the reverse is
true. It is well known that it has been and now is a party ques-
tion, and I freely and openly and willingly avow that I act upon
this subject as a party question, and as a party man I conceive
that each and every party ought to be composed and constituted
with reference to principles, and if a man acts upon principle, he
must necessarily, to a certain degree, act as a party man; and
I am free to confess that this is one of the principles of the party
to which I belong, which I am proud to say has its foundation on
principle. I therefore act in regard to this question as a party
man; and I believe that the gentleman from Adams himself, acts
from the same motives, although he is unwilling to avow it. If it
be not a party question, why do we see gentlemen of the opposite
party so strictly arrayed on the other side? There is the strongest
evidence that can be given in this Convention, that it is a party
question, the gentleman's declaration to the contrary notwith-
standing. I have observed that whenever certain gentlemen in
the opposite ranks get into a difficulty, certain allusions are thrown
out in relation to John Thompson and his team. Now, sir, I under-
stand the intention of these expressions; — I understand the mean-
ing intended to be conveyed, and the effect which gentlemen
intend to create by the use of these expressions, and I despise the
narrow-minded spirit which prompts their use. I hold such a
miserable low pettifogging mode of attack in the utmost contempt.
I shall, however, pass that by. I leave such things for what they
are worth, and I will leave those gentlemen who make use of them,
as the remnants of an ill-spent political life. Whatever course I
have taken, or may take, is founded upon principles, upon those
principles which I hold dear, and I acknowledge the right of no
individual to question my right to entertain them.

One word more, sir, upon the question before the committee,
and I have done. It has been alleged that the immigration of
foreigners into this State, and permitting them to exercise the

568 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

right of suffrage is deleterious to the interests of the State; that it
has a bad effect; and will always have a bad effect. Has there
been any evidence of this? Has there been a single instance
pointed out? The gentleman from Jo Daviess is the only individ-
ual who has attempted it. He has said that foreigners who
were employed upon the public works gave their votes in favor of
those persons who were favorable to the continuance of those
works, for the purpose of obtaining employment for themselves.
The answer of the gentleman from Cook upon this point is con-
clusive. It is true that upon the line of the canal individuals
endeavored, by representing themselves as being in favor of the
progress of the work, which was then on the point of being dis-
continued, to procure the votes of the laborers; and what was the
result? Those laborers, sir, opposed them on the day of election.
Those men are in that region very numerous; they have never set
in the exercise of the right of suffrage personal considerations
above those of the public interest. They are very numerous, and
yet in all the delegation from that region of the country, there is
but one member on this floor of foreign birth from that section of
the State: and though numerous, sir, they have not presumed to
ask, that which gentlemen have said they would ask, if the right
of suffrage should be extended to them.

But, said Mr. B., there is another view of this question which
induces me to extend the right of suffrage to foreign immigrants
after one year's residence. The right of suffrage, the right to a
voicte in the selection and election of the various officers in our
government, has had, and will have the effect of inducing them to
inform themselves as to the nature of our institutions and to
qualify themselves to discharge this and other duties understand-
ingly and in a proper manner. But, sir, if you deprive them of
this privilege, if you refuse to give them a voice in the administra-
tion of the government, you take away this incentive, this induce-
ment to thus qualify themselves, and you create in them a want
of attention, a carelessness, which in a great measure would render
them unfit for a proper exercise of this privilege. Such will, in
the course of things, be the effect on the minds of men, and such
has been the effect in all despotic governments, and governments
which deprive their people of this invaluable right, — a right

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 569

upon which the liberties of every nation in a great measure depends.
Mr. DAVIS, of Montgomery, said that he had not intended to
say anything on this subject. He had no apology to offer, how-
ever, for detaining the committee a few moments. He would not
suffer himself to indulge in abuse of foreigners, nor would he pass
any eulogies upon them. He proposed briefly to notice some of
the arguments which had been made use of. The gentleman from
Shelby, said Mr. Davis, stated clearly and distinctly that the
government ought not to extend the right of suffrage to aliens
until they become citizens; because, until they become citizens
this government had no control over them. The government,
according to the gentleman's views, would have no power to com-
pel these persons to defend the country in time of war; and that in
case they were admitted into the army, and should desert and go
over to the enemy, this government would have no power to punish
them. The gentleman (continued Mr. Davis), stated these things
as clear and indisputable facts, and so I maintain they are. No
gentleman here has, as yet, satisfactorily answered them. Is there
any gentleman who pretends to say that if we adopt a provision
giving the right of suffrage to foreigners, without naturali-
zation, they will be amenable to the laws of the general govern-
ment? Is there any gentleman here who will pretend to say that
the state of things, as stated by the gentleman from Shelby, does
not actually exist? If there be such an one, I would like to hear
him maintain that position. Is it not right then that a foreigner
should be required before being allowed to vote, to place himself
in a situation in which the government would have jurisdiction
and control over him, at least so far as it has over those who are
born here? Now, I call the attention of gentlemen on the other
side to this point, and if they are able to explain it to my satisfac-
tion, I hope they will do so. The gentleman from Jo Daviess,
this morning, placed the matter on its true ground; he argued it
fairly; and I would like to hear his arguments replied to and
refuted, if gentlemen are able to refute them. He said it was a
question of time; that it was a question as to whether it would not
be best for us and best for the foreigners themselves to make the
term of residence, previous to naturalization, equal to that re-
quired by the laws of the United States, as they are at present —

57°

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

which would make them qualified citizens everywhere; — make
them not only citizens of this State, but entitle them to the privi-
leges of citizenship in every other State in the Union, and bring
them completely under the jurisdiction of the government. That
would be placing the matter upon its true and proper foundation.
But the amendment proposes to place the foreigner as soon as he
lands on the shores of Illinois, upon precisely the same footing as
a man from the State of New York or Kentucky. Now, I ask is
this right? I understood the gentleman from Massac, (and there
is no gentleman on this floor in whose inteUigence and talent I
have more confidence, but it does seem to me that he was in error
in regard to this matter), I understood him to say that foreigners
had a natural right to vote. I maintain, sir, that they have not
a natural right. I say that the organization of government is
arbitrary, and that we, having organized a government of our own,
and conferred certain privileges upon our citizens, may say to
persons coming from another country, that they are not entitled
to claim anything as a natural right. Why, I should like to know,
if such doctrine as this is to be advocated here by lawyers, — by
those who have made the science of government their study. Sir,
in the broad open field of nature, before any government was
organized at all, men had natural rights; but the moment govern-
ments were organized, each man gave up a portion of his natural
rights. Is it to be contended here that people from every region
of the earth, people of all kindred and all colors, may come here
and claim national rights under our government? — (for the gentle-
man's doctrine carried out amounts to this, and nothing else).
He placed it in eflPect upon the broad platform that persons from
all parts of the habitable globe have a right to come here and claim
all the rights that we enjoy. The gentleman has placed himself
in this position, and he cannot escape from it.

Mr. BUTLER (interposing) said that the position of the
gentleman from Massac, as well as his own, was, that every indi-
vidual had a natural right to have a voice in the aflfairs of the gov-
ernment under which he lived.

Mr. DAVIS, continuing: The gentleman's explanation amounts
to the same thing. The gentlemen had better consult their books
and ascertain how governments are organized. I lay it down as

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 ST^

a principle, from which no intelligent man will attempt to escape,
that the organization of governments is arbitrary, and that every
individual yields up a portion of his natural rights, in order that
he may enjoy the protection of the government in those rights
which remain to him. The difference between the gentlemen and
myself is this: They contend that all persons are entitled to a
voice in the affairs of the government under which they live, with-
out submitting to those restrictions which the government sees
fit to impose. This I deny. I maintain that the government has
a right to prescribe restrictions. I maintain that an individual
has no natural rights under a government. He has only such
rights as he may acquire; and I lay it down as a broad principle,
from which no gentleman will attempt to escape, that this con-
vention has a right to prescribe in what manner aliens may be-
come citizens, and in regard to the particular manner, it is alto-
gether a question of expediency. But, the gentlemen say that
requiring a residence of one year before a foreigner shall be allowed
to vote, is depriving him of a natural right. Such a doctrine as
this would destroy the very foundation upon which all govern-
ments rest. If gentlemen think, that to carry out such a doctrine
as this would best promote the interests of the State, and have
strength to carry it out, let them do it. It is not my intention to
detain the committee very long. I said at the outset, that I
should neither praise foreigners nor abuse them; I hope at least
to have the privilege of claiming to understand the principles upon
which our government rests as well as they do.

The gentleman from Harding yesterday read a portion of
Washington's farewell address. Everyone must know that Wash-
ington's intention was to guard us against foreign influence.
Sir, when we abandon our naturalization laws and admit foreign-
ers to the privileges of citizenship without restrictions, do we not
subject ourselves to foreign influence to an alarming extent; to
such an extent, as upon the occurrence of a great political contest,
might put it in their power to subvert the liberties of the country?
It has been said, that it was a view entertained by a British states-
man, that the only way to subvert this government was to throw
amongst us a foreign population, and if we say that as soon as they
touch our shores they shall be l>ona fide citizens, might not such a

572 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

result be eflPected? Might it not be done? I am only supposing
a case, it is the duty of the government to guard against the
most remote possibility of evil. One word regarding the issue
which has been made by the gentleman from Lake: I understood
him to say that it was a party question. Now, I have said as
little about my constituency as any man. I represent in part two
counties which have a democratic majority of four hundred and
fifty. I took ground in my addresses to the people in favor of the
naturalization laws of the United States, and at no time did I find
it objected to by anyone.

I am going to close, sir, with a single remark in reference to
this John Thompson affair. The allusions of gentlemen to this
matter have been pronounced to be low and contemptible. These
expressions cannot apply to me, sir, because I have never said a
word about it; but suffer me now to say, that when I want to speak
of John Thompson and his oxen, I will do it; and no man that
breathes, no man that lives and moves, and has his being, shall
deter me from doing it. I hold myself responsible to no man for
any figure of speech that I may use. I care nothing about John
Thompson and his oxen; let it all go for what it is worth.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess next addressed the committee.
He desired to hear some good and sufficient reasons assigned by
gentlemen who were so desirous of depriving foreigners of the
privilege of exercising the elective franchise, for the position they
took. Were gentlemen afraid to express their opinions? Had
they any good and substantial reasons to sustain the principle
which they were inclined to advocate by their silent votes ? They
had as yet given no reasons; they had carefully refrained from
expressing an opinion; but he for one would not be satisfied with a
silent vote. The country would not be satisfied with it; the peo-
ple would expect to hear arguments and reasons from those who
voted against extending to foreigners the privilege of exercising
the elective franchise, to show that conferring upon them this
privilege heretofore had been deleterious to the interests of the
State.

My views on this subject, said Mr. Campbell, are practical
and we want the resources of this State developed, we want willing
hearts and strong hands to come here for the purpose of develop-

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 573

ing those resources. And when gentlemen give silent votes
against their admission, I must suppose that there are political
reasons why they are unwilling to reveal to the convention and
to the country, the motives by which they are actuated. Why
do they not come forward and state them boldly? Some gentle-
men say we have the means of accomplishing all that we desire,
and it is not our policy to hold out inducements to foreigners to
come amongst us. Sir, I for one am in favor of allowing the
people of Europe to whom we are indebted, to come here, and by
their labor, provide the means of paying the debts that we owe
them. Gentlemen say that it will create a competition which
will operate against our citizens. Sir, there is no competition
about it; it is not a subject about which our citizens fear com-
petition. It is hard labor that we require; and without which
we have not the means of relieving ourselves from the indebted-
ness which rests upon us.

It is unpleasant for me, Mr. Chairman, to refer to my colleague
from Jo Daviess; but I will state one fact, which I apprehend the
gentleman will not be willing to deny; if he does it will be a denial
of the truth. Before the election in the county of Jo Daviess,
the gentleman and myself rode out to a place called Vinegar Hill,
where about sixty foreigners were at work. In conversation with
them about this question of naturalization, the gentleman stated,
he was in favor of foreigners residing here one year, filing a declar-
ation of their intention to become citizens, and then exercising the
privilege of the elective franchise. The good faith with which
that gentleman has carried out this pledge, has been revealed to
the convention this morning. This is the truth, sir; it is undeni-
able. Sir, when I make a pledge, I carry it out in good faith.
My opinions before the election, are the same as after it; and
gentlemen who take a contrary course may reconcile it to their
own consciences, but they cannot reconcile it with the great prin-
ciples of truth and justice.

Much has been said, sir, with regard to foreigners coming to
this country, and the great danger in which the institutions of the
country would be placed. Sir, I called upon gentlemen on Friday,
when I first rose to address the committee upon this subject, to
point out to me the great evils that have arisen, as they allege,

574

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

under our present constitutional provisions; not a single reply
have I heard, not one single reason have I heard from gentlemen
on the opposite side for the assertion that those enormous evils
exist, of which they complain so loudly. And I will ask gentle-
men, occupying the position we do here, as a part of this great
nation, would it not well become us to pay some little regard to
the declaration of him, whose portrait hangs above your head,
sir, that this country is the asylum of the oppressed of every land,
although my friend from Montgomery, who read from a
fragment of a native American paper, a different representation
of the views of that great man?

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery. — I call on the gentleman to say
whether I did not read it correctly?

Mr. CAMPBELL. — It was, I admit, a fragment of an opinion
of Washington, carefully culled out to suit native American views.
And what great man is there who has ever lived in this country,
whose opinions may not be quoted to his disadvantage? Why,
the devil himself Can quote scripture to suit his purpose; the
gentleman can also quote isolated portions of the writings of
Washington, Jefferson and Madison, to suit his purpose. Look
at the proceedings of these native Americans ! Native Americans!
Native Americans! I abhor, I detest, I hate them.

Look at the magnificent domes and spires pointing to Heaven,
which they reduced to ashes in Philadelphia; yet my colleague
justifies their acts! Religion and human rights were both dis-
regarded and trampled under foot by those ruthless men; both
sunk before their violence; and yet gentlemen will stand up and
assert, that the cause of all this was the presence of foreigners in
this country! Such an argument, and coming from such a source!

Who was it that achieved the liberties of this country? L,ook
for a moment, at the proceedings of the Continental Congress; —
they addressed a memorial to the people of Ireland, asking for
their assistance; and I ask you, sir, if there ever was an instance
in which the flag of liberty was unfurled anywhere, in any part of
the world, and Irishmen were not seen to rally around it, and to
bathe the ground over which it waved with their blood, whenever
it was assailed? Look, sir, at our standing army at this time;
two-thirds of that army is composed of foreigners — men who are

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 575

always ready to brave danger and peril; to stand in the front rank
in tiie day of conflict; the foremost whenever a difficult charge is
to be made, marching over the dead bodies of their comrades to
victory or to death. It is foreigners who are called upon to do it,
and they shrink not from the performance of it. As they fall
before the fire of the enemy the places of the fallen are filled by
their surviving comrades; these are the men on whom to rely.
I do not say this in disparagement of our countrymen. I know
the love of country with which they are imbued; I know the gallant
deeds that our volunteers have done; but I cannot refrain when I
hear foreigners depreciated in this hall, from reminding gentlemen
of their devotedness and self-sacrificing spirit. The foreigner
comes here as a matter of choice; it is the act of his own free will
and enlightened judgment; he comes here to enjoy the freedom
that we enjoy; to escape from the oppressions which he has been
made to suffer; and how have we acted towards him? We have
borne him down with heavy and strong irons. Was it, Sir, for
himself that LaFayette come here and shed his blood? Did he
expect to enjoy the liberty for which he was fighting? No, sir;
it was for those who should come after him. Look at Montgom-
ery, whose rich, red, republican blood melted the Canadian snow.
Was he fighting for himself when he yielded up the divine essence
with which the Creator had endowed him? No, sir, he was fight-
ing for the cause of liberty. Did he suppose that any American
who should come after him would ever raise his voice to deny to
others the rights and privileges for which he fought, and bled,
and died? Oh! sir, it is a horrible thought! The great, glorious,
and immortal Washington declared that this country was the
asylum of the oppressed. We had the prayers of the Irish people
in the Revolutionary war; their supplications were addressed to
high Heaven for our success; they sent their sons to our aid; they
sent them to assist in maintaining the cause of liberty; and yet
there are gentlemen now in this Hall who maintain that those
men — the descendants of the very men, it may be, or at all events
descendants of the same stock as those who rocked the cradle of
liberty, should not be admitted to a participation in those privi-
leges which we enjoy!

576 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

"Can these things be?

And overcome us like a summer cloud,

Without our special wonder?"

Sir, I feel an abiding interest in this matter. I feel as though
we were departing from the principles established by those who
founded the government. Why should not foreigners come here
and participate in the benefits of the free and independent govern-
ment which we are enjoying? Look at our broad domain; our
widely extended prairies, rich beyond comparison; shall we repulse
this tide of population now flowing towards our State, lighted by
the ardent sun of liberty, which rising in the East is travelling
onward, till at last its golden beams will rest upon the waves of
the broad Pacific? Shall we resist the tide thus rolling onward?
No, — rather let it flow, and swell our greatness; and let the stars
and stripes wave proudly over a prosperous and happy people.
Let us not say to those who desire to participate with us in the
enjoyment of those blessings, — we will not suffer you to come and
enjoy the blessings of independence, which your fathers assisted
us in achieving. Would this be right? Is it an American princi-
ple? Is it the doctrine which we ought to avow in the face of the
world? Is it the result of such a doctrine which is carrying our
army victoriously to the city of Mexico? I deny it. Liberty in
its broadest sense is emphatically the doctrine of the American
people. Despotism is to be broken down and destroyed through-
out the world. Look at our Missionaries now in Rome; yes, in
Rome! once the seat of learning, science and the arts, when
America was a wilderness — a terra incognita. We are now send-
ing missionaries to impart to them the lights of knowledge, 'and
yet we say to the people of Europe, you shall not come here and
participate with us in the blessings we enjoy.

Sir, I know I speak the true voice of the American people.
I know I speak the voice of every liberal heart. Those gentlemen
who see fit to differ with me in opinion, I care not where they come
from, whether they have lived under the charter of Charles the
Second or not, they cannot advance their illiberal principles in
the State of Illinois.

One word more. Sir, and I have done. We have extended to
aliens after a short residence here, the privilege of exercising the

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 sil

elective franchise. It is impossible, that in the formation of a
new constitution, they should be deprived, in any degree, of the
privileges which they are enjoying. I apprehend that it is
admitted on all hands that it is not in the power of this Conven-
tion to take away from them the rights which are guaranteed to
them by the constitution under which we live at present; and are
we to make a difference between those now here, and those who
come afterwards ? Suppose that Congress should listen to Native
Americanism (which God forbid); and require foreigners to remain
twenty-one years before being entitled to the privilege of exercis-
ing the elective franchise. Then if a foreigner comes here, he
must remain twenty-one years, before he will have a right to vote
under our constitution. Would this be just? Would it be right?
Shall we make this invidious distinction ? It seems to me it cannot
be our poUcy. It seems to me it would be manifestly wrong.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery rose and addressed the chair.
I understand the gentleman to say, said Mr. Davis, that two-
thirds of our standing army are foreigners, and that when in the
heat of battle men are called upon to make a desperate charge,
these are the men. Sir, to this I enter my unqualified dissent.
Sir, the idea that an army, two-thirds of which is composed of
foreigners, will stand up and bear the brunt of battle, in a difficult
and desperate charge, more patriotically than an army compared
[sic] entirely of our own citizens, is a doctrine that I never will
subscribe to, while a drop of American blood runs in my veins.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Their superior discipline enables them to
do it.

Mr. DAVIS. I care nothing about their discipline, and I
wish to say nothing disparagingly of foreigners, but, sir, I refer
you to the heroic acts of our volunteers in Mexico. I refer you to
the field of Buena Vista. Who was it that bared their bosoms to
the shafts of the enemy? Who was it that drenched the soil
with their gore? Was it a standing army composed of foreigners?
No, sir, no; it was the sons of Kentucky; it was the sons of Illinois,
who drenched the soil to profusion with their blood. . Sir, who was
it that gave up their lives in the battle of Cerro Gordo? Who
was it that marched fearlessly up to the cannon's mouth? Was
it this well drilled and well discipHned standing army composed

578 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of foreigners? The response, sir, is no! — no! — no! It was the
citizen soldier; — the soldier who had drunk the spirit of republican
liberty from his mother's breast; — who had been dandled (as was
said yesterday) upon the lap of an American mother. It was the
citizens of Illinois and Kentucky that rushed to the mighty and
unequal conflict, determined to conquer or die. It was men em-
boldened by patriotic feelings, by a love of country, which is
implanted in every American bosom. It was no standing army
composed of foreigners. Sir, it is an honor now to be an lUinoian.
She stands side by side with Mississippi and Tennessee; and she
stands there at great cost. She stands there at the cost of the
lives of her most valued citizens; — at the cost of the lives of
the sons of Illinois, who have poured out their life-blood upon the
battlefields of Buena Vista and Cerro Gordo. They have created
an imperishable monument to the fame of Illinois, — one which
every American will be proud of, as long as the "star spangled
banner" floats upon the breeze. Sir, they have done more, —
they have established beyond the possibility of a doubt, the fact,
that a standing army, so far from having any advantage over an
army of volunteers, is infinitely beneath them in efficiency. Our
volunteers went to Mexico with the prejudices of their command-
ing officers against them. It was supposed that no confidence
could be placed in them undisciplined as they were, having abruptly
exchanged their peaceful homes and fire-sides for scenes of strife
and carnage. They went there to give the lie to the doctrine which
has been preached, that a standing army is necessary. They have
shown that the proud, the noble reliance for the defence of the
country, is upon the citizen soldier, because his heart beats with
patriotism, — because he is ready on all occasions to sell his life in
defence of liberty, — because he is always ready to defend the
country with his blood.]

Mr. PRATT said, he hoped the Convention would not con-
sider him as saying more than was due to himself after what had
fallen from his colleague in relation to his allusion to the Phila-
delphia riots, and his pledges to his constituents. He could
not understand the object of that gentleman in making the
attack. It would, however, if not replied to, have the eflFect

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1847 579

of lessening my influence here, if I have any, and place me before
my constituents as a man derelict and wavering in my pledges
to them. He charged me with having, a short time before the
election, gone with him to a certain place in Jo Daviess county,
where there were some sixty or seventy foreigners, and that I there
pledged myself to go for a proposition the same as the one I have
this day spoken against. That by this means I had deceived my
constituents, and had stolen votes, which otherwise would have
been thrown against me. This is a serious charge, and it is but
proper that I should state what did take place on that occasion.
If the charge be true, honorable men should know it; and as the
charge, if true, will degrade me, it is but proper that all should
understand it if it be untrue. The facts are these: A few days
before the election, my colleague and myself got into a buggy and
rode out into the country; on our way, and at a place called
Vinegar Hill, we accidentally came across a body of Irishmen,
sixty or seventy in number, making what is called a bee-fence.
They were all known to me, and more acquainted with me than
Mr. Campbell, because he had been absent from there for nearly
four years. They were most of them personal friends of mine,
who had heard me speak often, and I suppose six-sevenths of them
were my clients. While sitting in the buggy and conversing with
them, we very naturally questioned them about this subject
of foreigners. Mr. Campbell made a remark, the substance of
which was "I am opposed to any alteration in the present constitu-
tion. I am for allowing all who come here the right to vote
after six months residence." I said to them, and put the question
only as a feeler, in order to obtain an expression of their views,
and never considered it as pledging myself in any manner upon
the subject, "what would you think of a proposition to enlarge
the term to one year, and require a declaration of intention to
become citizens?" That I made any pledge to vote for such a
proposition, or expressed myself in favor of it, never occurred to
my mind. Those foreigners, however, replied "we are not in
favor of any such proposition, we want no provision other than
that of becoming citizens; you have degraded us by your mistaken
confidence and friendship, as we, in consequence of being allowed
to vote, have not become citizens." This is what took place. I

58o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

never made any such pledge as he speaks of. I can assign no
motive or cause why the gentleman has placed such a construction
upon what took place at that time, except that there was a barrel
of beer and a keg of whisky on the ground, and that sometimes
some of our friends, from such causes, have produced in their minds
an excitement which impairs their recollection upon what does
actually take place on such occasions. Nothing has ever been
said by that gentleman since upon this subject. We have ever
been on the most intimate terms. He is a man whom I have
always treated as a friend; in sickness .and in health I have de-
tended him, when attacked, as I would have done myself, and I can
attribute his attack upon me to-day as prompted only [by] chagrin
and feelings of envy, caused by what he may feel has been the
effect and impression created by the remarks made by me to-day.

Mr. CAMPBELL said, it was unpleasant to be compelled to
refer to the personal remarks of his colleague. I can only say
that the statement which he has made of what took place at the
interview with the foreigners, of which he insinuates my memory
is not clear, is most unqualifiedly false, and I hold myself responsi-
ble for the remark, and if he is a man of courage he will notice it.
Why, sir, he admits that he put the question to them, but he says
he did it as a feeler. He gave them to understand that he was in
favor of such a proposition. He says they were his friends, and
that six-sevenths of them were his clients. Six-sevenths of sixty men
in Jo Daviess county, the gentleman's clients! He says that
they all answered that they were opposed to any such thing.
Why, sir, we were not in conversation with one-twentieth of the
people there at any one time, and how could they have all answered
his proposition, when he, sitting in the buggy, put the question
to a few? Sir, if he had made there, or in Jo Daviess, such a
speech as he made here to-day, he would never have held a seat
on this floor — and as it was, he got here by only nine votes! I
hope the Convention will not be troubled with this matter again,
but that it will be left to ourselves to settle, personally, and out of
the Convention.

The committee then rose and reported progress. And then,
on motion, and to give the Districting committee time to meet,
the Convention adjourned till to-morrow.

XLI. THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Crist.

Leave of absence for ten days was granted Messrs. Trower,
Laughlin and Powers.

A call of the Convention was ordered and taken.

According to order, the Convention resolved into a committee
of the whole — Mr. Harvey in the chair, and resumed the con-
sideration of the report of the committee on Elections and the
Right of Suffrage.

Mr. HENDERSON said, that he lived in Joliet, and never
heard of the frauds upon the elections, or the running of wagon
loads of foreigners from there to Chicago, on election days. He
was in favor of the amendment. He thought it our policy to hold
out to the foreign immigrants, the greatest inducements, to settle
in our state, in order that by an increase of our population, the
aggregate amount of tax may be greater, and we have more means
to pay our debt with. The capital of all states was their popula-
tion; their wealth — the industry of their inhabitants. These
foreigners coming into our state, added both to the wealth and
capital of our state.

Mr. KNOWLTON said, that he was a member of the committee
who had reported this section, and he would express his views
upon the subject. He had no fears in expressing his opinion to be
in favor of the report, although there were some three or four
hundred foreign voters in his county, and a large democratic
majority. He had taken the ground there, that citizenship should
be required, and the mass of the intelligent foreigners asked for
such a provision. He had seen the ignorance of foreigners in
relation to our institutions, and from experience, he would not
entrust them with the elective franchise, until they had first
become citizens. He had seen them led like cattle to the polls
by designing demagogues. He extended his remarks upon this
point for some time, and argued that five years was but a short
period in which to acquire a knowledge of our government, suffi-

582 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

cient to exercise the right of suffrage with prudence and judgment.
He pointed out the immense hordes of immigrants flocking to our
shores, and the probable numbers that were yet to follow, the
possibility of their out-numbering the natives at the polls, and
asked would this Convention set the example of permitting them,
fresh from their native land, to decide and control our elections.
He commented at length upon the downfall of the Roman empire,
the Athenian and Adriatic governments, by the admission of
foreigners, and thought the warning thus set, should be well con-
sidered, before we adopted the principle contained in the amend-
ment. He alluded to the love of country, and denounced that
man who did not love his country above all others, to be dangerous
to any community. Foreigners must love and value their native
lands more than any other. He also opposed the amendment, on
constitutional grounds. It interfered with the powers given to
Congress, to establish uniform naturalization laws.

[Mr. KNOWLTON said:^^

Mr. Chairman, Already has the debate upon this vexed
question been protracted to such an extent that I am exceedingly
unwilling to trespass longer upon the time and patience of this
convention; and I would not now do so, were it not that as a
member of the committee from which the report emanated, now
under consideration, I feel it incumbent upon me to express my
views in relation to this report. My duty to my constituents
demands that I should explain to this convention, my opinion in
relation to this subject. Sir, I am not one of those who remain
silent through fear upon any question where it is necessary my
views should be heard. I intend always to be prepared to act up
to the requirements of duty, and whenever the path of duty lies
clearly and in straight lines before me, I hesitate not for an instant
to enter upon it. A sense of duty should be with us everywhere,
most especially with us, who are acting, as we are perhaps now
acting, for unborn millions. In such a situation I know no fear,
and there is no opinion that I hold, no feehng of my bosom that
I wish to screen from the eye of a prying world. It was intimated
by the gentleman from Jo Daviess yesterday, that there were

*'This speech by Knowlton is taken fromthe Sangamo Journal, August 27.

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 583

members of this convention, who would not come forward and
express their opinions upon this subject, for fear of offending the
foreign population that reside within the limits of this State. Sir,
I am not one of those that entertain any such fear. Although in
the county which I have the honor in part to represent, there are
some two or three hundred men not born upon our soil, that vote
at our polls. Nor, were a majority of those men opposed to my
election? Among them I acknowledge some of my warmest and
best friends, and I am proud to believe that it is their desire, that
the elective franchise of their adopted country, should be faith-
fully and carefully guarded.

And, sir, I will suggest another reason, and a stronger one too,
why it becomes my imperious duty to advocate the proposition
that foreigners should become naturalized before they are entitled
to the privileges of the elective franchise. Sir, in a circular that
I issued to my constituents, previous to the election, I freely and
fully stated my opinions upon this subject. I took the same
ground then that I take now, and yet, I believe, I had a majority
of all the alien voters in my county in my favor. I often con-
versed with them upon this subject, and I am happy to say, that
they mostly agreed with me in opinion, and were desirous that an
organic law should be passed and incorporated into the consti-
tution, requiring those aliens that shall settle in our State, after
the adoption of the new constitution, to become naturalized
before they are entitled to the privileges of the elective franchise.
I know not what may be the wishes and the feelings of the alien
population in other counties; but in mine, I believe it to be a
settled conviction in the minds of the foreigners, those of them
who understand the nature and character of our institutions, that
such a law should be passed. They ask that it may be passed.
They ask it for their own protection and for the protection, of what
to them, is now their common country. If they are good citizens,
could it be otherwise than that they should desire it? Is the
right of franchise to be cheaply purchased? Is it not one of the
dearest privileges that we possess? Can we hold it too sacred?
Can we guard it too strongly? I think not. Sir. It was a privi-
lege secured with blood, and it should be more esteemed than the
diamonds of Golconda. It has been said and reiterated in this

584 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

convention, that there can be no reason brought forward why an
alien should not be entitled to vote as soon, and upon the same
terms as a citizen from a sister State. Sir, all men do not think
alike, and perhaps it is well for the world that it is so. It has been
my fortune to have some acquaintance with aliens — as much per-
haps as any member who has addressed the committee — and it
would have pleased me much to have found them as intelligent and
as well informed as my own countrymen. I do not mean to have
it understood that I do not believe, aye, that I do not know, that
there are good and valuable men among them; but my experience
has convinced me, that they are not as capable of understanding
our laws, and appreciatmg the value of our institutions, and of
balloting with the same discrimination and practical knowledge,
after a short residence among us, as those who have beeh born,
and reared, and educated in our country. My experience tells
me that this is the case with the majority of our foreign popula-
tion, and had it not been so strongly and strenuously asserted, how
extensive was their learning, how great their patriotism, and
how much superior they were in the knowledge of the laws and
constitution of our country, to those who have been born on our
soil, it would not have been necessary for me to have stated what
my experience has been. I believe that the conclusion which I
have arrived at, and which I have here stated, regarding aliens,
to be correct; and I believe that the Frenchman, the German, the
Swede, the Russian, aye even the Prussian, (and it is said that in
Prussia exists the best system of common schools in the world),
cannot properly be prepared to give his vote in the short space
of one year from the time he shall make his home upon our prairie
soil. Why, sir, when they first come among us they cannot utter
a word in, nor read a line of our language.

Then whence their knowledge of our institutions? It has been
said that they study their nature and their character by their
firesides, in the old world from whence they have emigrated.
How many of them to whom the art of printing is but as a dead
letter? How many can obtain from prejudiced books, what it
takes years of practical experience to acquire? Until they know
somewhat of our language, whatever idea they receive of the
character of our government, they must obtain from party men,

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 585

be those men whigs or democrats. On this question, I trust I
am above all party spirit, any party feeling. They may go, thus
circumstanced, unwittingly to the polls, without reflection, with-
out knowledge. Is it so with those who have been born in this
country, those who have been nursed upon our soil — those over
whom the eagle of liberty, that proud bird, whom we have chosen
as our national emblem, has ever stretched her protecting wings —
those whose first breath was drawn, whose first accents were lisped
in an atmosphere of freedom? Sir, we have heard from the pulpit,
from the forum, from the stump, from the corner of the streets,
everywhere, wherever men do congregate, the principles of our
government discussed, until those principles have become "as
familiar to us as household words.' ' Is there no advantage in this?
Is there no advantage in beginning early in life to make a subject
so important our study? Is there no advantage in hearing it
talked over and canvassed? Is there no advantage in listening
to the opinions of those who have made it the study of their
lives? Why is it, sir, that as soon as the child begins to articulate,
to lisp in broken accents the idiom of his mother tongue, the fond
parent commences to teach him his alphabet? Is it not that the
young mind may early be put in training for several studies; that
it may gently and quietly unfold itself, and thus proceeding
onward from step to step, at last, after the long lapse of years,
be able to master the most abstruse and difficult of the sciences?
Can a child do all this in a year? Can the full grown man, with
all his feelings chastened and all his intellectual faculties devel-
oped? This is not experience. And shall we promulgate to the
world that a man who knows not a word of our language, who
never uttered, in our pure Anglo Saxon, the term republican,
can come here and forthwith understand our institutions better
than we do? Mr. Chairman, there are such things as demagogues
in this country, creatures with a name, but without form or sub-
stance. O! that I could portray them in all their horrid deform-
ity;— that I could paint them upon the retina of every man's
mind in this convention, in their true colors, in all their utter
loathsomeness. What reck they of country, of State, of State
pride, of national prosperity, if they can but carry out their own
vile schemes of personal aggrandizement? Sir, the practised

586 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

demagogue has no heart. If he could but gain a vote by it, he
would utter a stump speech upon his mother's grave, ere the fresh
earth that had been piled upon her bosom has been warmed by
the rays of the first rising sun. He would mount his father's
coffin, and hold forth to the wondering multitude, ere all that
pertained to him of mortality had in its dark, narrow, subterrane-
ous cabin been laid. Sir, it is time that the spirit of demagoguism
should be looked upon with that contempt, that utter contempt
that its low and bastard lineage would seem to require. But it is
a strong passion. It is confined to no age, no nation, no clime.
Scotland, old, ancient Scotland, the land of Wallace and of Bruce,
has, in these our days of modern degeneracy, become tainted and
tinctured with it. It may be a counterfeit presentment. Per-
chance the blood of the children of Green Erin may have been
mingled with and thrilled through the veins of some of Scotia's
pretended sons.

But, sir, let me not be misunderstood. I am not opposed to
foreigners emigrating to this State. I wish not to prevent them
from settling here. I have always loved and respected the great
and the good of other climes. No matter where they were born,
where they lived, or what sun had burned upon their complexion.
Who of us does not feel a pride in, aye, a love for, our mother
country's mighty dead, as well as her mighty living? If there are
any such in our land, they are not truly American in spirit. They
are not such Americans as we would wish all those to be, who claim
a birthright upon our own free soil. Can we forget, and would
we, if we could, forget, how, prior to the Revolution, the elder
Chatham, and Fox, and Burke, and Barre, in England's proud
parliament, lifted up their voices, and poured forth their glowing
eloquence in favor of the then American colonies? How they re-
sisted to the last, with argument, with persuasion, aye, even with
denunciation, that taxation of the colonies that was proposed by
their tyrant king? — how Pitt forewarned him that he was about
to lose the brightest jewel of his crown? Have we not loved to
read and ponder over the glowing pages of Chaucer, and Spenser,
and Milton, and Dryden, and him

' 'Who played with the thunder as with a familiar friend.
And wove his garland of the lightning's twist?"

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 587

And Shakespeare, too, the child of fancy and of song, — he who
delved amid the abstruse mysteries of the human mind, and etched
out the lineaments of the human passions with a pencil of living
light, — he who wrote in our own language, in whose veins coursed
and thrilled our Anglo Saxon blood, — he who played upon "a
harp of a thousand strings, and tuned them all to sweet accord."

These, all these, are a part and a portion of our own fame.
They lived in another age, in another clime. But we claim a
common origin with them; we love them, and regard them in a
measure, as a part and a portion of ourselves. Is it not so? And
when the gifted and the philanthropic of England's sons are
spoken of, do we not feel almost as if they were our own country-
men; and is this not one of the noblest, and proudest traits of
American character, that we can look across the broad ocean, and
believe, and feel, that the fame of the distinguished scholars,
and statesmen, of the mother country but adds luster to our own
republic? Nor is it to the mother country alone, we offer up a
grateful remembrance. Sternly we strove with her for the high
privilege of ruling ourselves, and of becoming, the greatest and
purest, of the nations of the earth. To have become so, we owe
much to those whose birth was not on our land. Our memories
dwell with a fond delight, upon the noble Pulaski; the generous
the valourous DeKalb, whose life blood crimsoned the battle-
field of Camden; and above all of Poland's gallant sons; upon
the great and good Kosciusko. Him, of whom the poet has elo-
quently written:

"Hope for a season bade the world farewell:
And freedom shrieked as Kosciusko fell."

Nor is the youthful and generous Montgomery forgotten. He
who despised toil, and laughed hunger and hardships to scorn;
as he led his valorous continentals, through an unbroken wilder-
ness, to the very mouths of the cannon, that burst on the walls
of Quebec; and there sealed with his blood, his untiring devotion
to freedom.

Have we not gloried in the bards, heroes, and statesmen of
Ireland? Have we not mourned the early fate, of her gifted pat-
riot Emmet? Does not her Fitzgerald, and her Theabold Wolfe
Tone live, in unchanging freshness in our memories? Have we

588 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

not named her, the greenest isle of the ocean? How often have
our sympathies been aroused at the story of her sufferings and
oppressions? How often have our heart-strings thrilled, as we
have heard trilled forth, from manly lips, as well as those of rosy
beauty, the sweet, yet mournful song of "Erin go bragh." And
has Germany been unremembered? Kant, Kotzebue, Goethe,
Schiller; they too live, in the hearts of the American people. A
portion of their wide-world fame, is ours, we have wept over the
untimely fate, while we have read the soul stirring melodies, of
him, of the "sword and the lyre." Their countrymen live with
us. Connected as we are with them, our memories, often turn
with them to the "Fatherland;" our reading, or our associations,
the feelings that link us to the German emigrant, make us familiar
with, and lead uS to admire, the great names, that adorn the pages
of German history, — we all feel these things — and memory with
a lingering fondness, often revisits the shrine of their hallowed
greatness; at the same time could the departed worthies, whom I
have mentioned, be permitted to come among us now, and to
lift up their voices, upon the floor of this convention; they would
entreat us, by that holy regard which we should have for our
country; by that love of freedom that knows no price; by
those inestimable rights, of which the present generation are the
inheritors, and which our fathers most dearly purchased; to guard
more securely than we have hitherto done, the purity of the
elective franchise.

Could such aliens as the illustrious names that I have referred
to be permitted to go to the polls, there would be no danger that
they would misuse or misapply the privileges granted to them.
But there are thousands of their countrymen swarming to our
shores who have not their knowledge, their pride of character,
their consistency, their judgment, and who possibly might not
have, in the short space of one year, that love for our country,
that abiding interest in her institutions which would properly lead
them to exercise this sacred right. Sir, we are asked to remember
the services of LaFayette. What patriot can forget them? What
American heart but throbs quicker at the mention of his name?
My New England mother taught me first to revere my God, next
to him, he who stands out so lifelike upon that canvas that hangs

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 589

above your head, and next, the patriotic, the gallant, the chiv-
alrous Marquis de Lafayette. And wherever it may be my fortune
to roam, whether it should be in the sunny clime of his own loved
France, or upon the inhospitable soil of frozen Russia; whether
to where the Oregon pours its world of waters ' 'in one continuous
sound," or where the simoon sweeps over the arid desert, his
memory and the fame of his deeds will still be with me there.
And let me tell you, sir, that when, in the days of my boyhood,
I read the history of our Revolution, I hardly knew which I loved
the best, and which I honored most, the soldier of my natal land,
or the foreign soldier that battled by his side. The ardent feel-
ings of my youth twined around the gallant Frenchman with a
gratitude but little inferior to that which I felt for my own country-
men. Nor have the rougher scenes of maturer life obliterated my
young affections and remembrances. The fire of gratitude still
burns in my bosom, if not with so fierce a glow, yet with a steadier
flame. And shall it be told to us who have experienced these
feelings, that we are opposed to foreigners; that we have no phi-
lanthropy, no kindly feelings for such of them as come to our
shores with the intention of becoming a part and a portion of our
government? If they tell us so, they cannot read our hearts;—
they cannot read what has been inscribed upon the tablets there,
with a pen so enduring that the black ink of demagoguism cannot
obliterate a single line. I repeat it again, sir, I am not opposed
to foreigners coming among us. But I do oppose their voting,
till they are qualified to give their votes in a judicious, under-
standing manner, according to their own knowledge and opinions,
and not by the dictation of partisans and demagogues. Sir, the
associations of our youth are a part of our being. They are inter-
woven with the best and finest feelings of our nature. We would
not part with them if we could; we could not if we would. We
all love our common country. We love, particularly love the place
where our first infant breath was drawn. It is in vain, sir, for
anyone to tell me that in one year he can forget all the associa-
tions and remembrances of his youth. Sir, can you forget (and
you have been in this State some ten years) the brook by which
in boyhood days you played — the old gray rock by which that
streamlet flowed — the venerable oak, beneath whose rich, luxuri-

590 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ant foliage you frolicked away so many happy hours — aye, and
with those who, when the heart was in life's early freshness, ere
its tenderest petals were uncrisped by the frosts of care, were
your companions then? Can you, at your bidding, forget all
these? Do they not live in your memory, as in imagination you
go back to your own green hills? Time may have dimmed our
love for all these, but still that love lies broad and deep within our
bosoms, ready to gush up whenever the chords of memory are
touched. So with the foreigner, when he first arrives upon our
shores. Are not his thoughts away, in the home he has left, in
his own loved cabin, in the land of his nativity? It cannot be
otherwise. And if, when an alien comes here he begins to anathe-
matize his country, and to speak of it in derogatory terms, I wish
to have nothing to do with such a man. He is either a convict,
who has fled from justice, he is either a felon, or his heart has never
been attuned to the strongest and most imperishable feelings of
our nature. There was one of Scotland's poets, sir, that expressed
this sentiment more forcibly, more touchingly, than I can:

' 'Breathes there a man with soul so dead.
Who never to himself hath said.

This is my own, my native land;
Whose heart within him ne'er hath burned,
As home his footsteps he hath turned;

From wandering on a foreign strand:
If such there breathe, go mark him well.
For him no minstrel raptures swell.' '

"The wretch concentered all in self.

Living shall forfeit fair renown.

And doubly dying, shall go down
To the vile earth from whence he sprung.
Unwept, unhonored, and unsung.' '

This is the language of one of Scotia's noblest bards, and a
sentiment more just and true "was never married to immortal
verse." It is true in the abstract; it is true in fact. These feel-
ings are linked with our very being, and the alien cannot, if he is
worthy to become an American citizen, in a moment cast them

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 591

off. He who will, without a struggle, forget his native country,
forget all his early a sociations, fling them aside as he would a
worn-out garment, will never be of any advantage to his adopted
country. In all ages, the traitor has been despised; yet if, while
living he shall curse his natal land, he but causes himself to be
scoffed at and scorned by the worthy and the good. And when he
dies, truly he dies a double death, none to take note of his depart-
ure, "none so vile to do him reverence." Who would shed a tear
over such a man's grave? Sir, the man who does not love his
country, no matter what country may have given him birth, is
not the man that should enlist either our feelings of philanthropy
or generosity. Such a man is a stranger to those emotions and
passions which we desire should be possessed by all whom we
admit into our great common family. He would prove a traitor,
at any time, for a small reward, to his adopted country. Such a
man would be regardless of the fame or happiness of the wife of
his bosom, of the children of his affection; — affection! he would
not know the meaning of the word. Show me the man who can
fling from him the associations of his early life, the endearing
recollections of his childhood's home, and I will show you in return
a man adequate to any villainous deed — a man on all occasions
ripe ' 'for treason, strategems, and spoils.' ' Sir, it has been argued
upon this floor, that every man that pays taxes should have a
voice in making the laws by which he is governed; that when we
tax the foreigner, and do not permit him to vote, as a necessary
consequence, he becomes exceedingly dissatisfied. What do
gentlemen require? Do they not ask for the alien what he would
not ask for himself, especially if his own free will was not biased
by petty demagogues and corrupt partisans. In our progress up
to the present period of the existence of our government, we have
so conducted it as to challenge the admiration, perhaps the envy
of the world. We have acquired great fame abroad. Have
foreigners helped to exalt that fame? Do they give us a prouder
and brighter name? I must say that I was somewhat surprised
to hear the gentleman from Massac assert, that the alien popula-
tion who come among us, almost without exception, were men of
character, wealth, knowledge, and respectability. Is the gentle-
man well informed upon the subject of which he has spoken? I

592 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

am inclined to think he is not, when he permits himself to make
such statements as I have referred to. I am sorry that the gentle-
man is not better informed; that he does not better understand
the true character and position of the people of whom he has
spoken. These aliens emigrate to our shores; we receive them
with open arms; we extend over them the aegis of our laws; we
protect them against the tyranny of the dynasties of Europe; we
make them equal upon their arrival, almost, with our citizens;
and yet it is asked of us, what do you do for them? They pay
taxes, perform road labor, and you do nothing for them in return.
Sir, is it not something to feed the starving millions that have
hastened, and are now hastening to our shores ? Do we not enable
them to become owners of our soil? Do we not put them in a
way of procuring a comfortable subsistence, for themselves and
their families? Do we not exempt them from militia trainings,
and from sitting on juries until they become naturalized? And
is it not right that they should render something in return for
all this? Is it not right that they should help to make the roads
on which they travel? Why, the arguments of the gentlemen
who have addressed the committee, in opposition to this report,
seems to be, that those aliens who come to us to better their con-
dition, should be placed a head and shoulders above those, who
have been so unfortunate, as to have been born on American soil!
Should they not be required to pay something for the protection
that government extends to them? They have access at all times
to our courts, or the redress of any wrongs, of which they may have
cause to complain. Should they not be required to pay a trifling
tax, as a partial equivalent for these advantages? It is not after
all, a tenth part of what their tithe would be at home. The trifling
tax they would have to pay, so far from being a burthen on them,
is absolutely nothing, in comparison to the advantages which
they derive from the privilege of settling among us, and of being
governed and protected by our laws.

It has been said, that we want our State filled up, and that
therefore we should hold out every inducement in our power to
increase immigration. Will the right class of aliens, such as we
should be happy and proud to call citizens, after an apprentice-
ship of five years, be at all affected by the alteration we propose to

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 593

make? It they have determined to settle upon our rich soil, and
to cultivate it, will the altering our constitution alter their deter-
mination? Not at all. But I honestly believe the well informed
foreigner would like us all the better for it. An alien cannot sit
upon a jury until he is naturalized. And yet there are members
of this convention so inconsistent as to desire them to be per-
mitted to help elect the judges of our courts. Sir, the alien can
vote for all offices, from a president down to a constable. He
cannot sit upon a jury, to try a case of a few dollars between his
neighbors, till he is naturalized. Yet he can help to elect the
judge that, in one sense, has our fortunes, our liberty, our lives
at his disposal! What a splendid inconsistency.

But, sir, I will say a few words in relation to the increase of
our foreign population. In 1812, there was but one alien in this
country to every forty persons native born. How was it in 1846?
There was one alien to every six persons born upon our soil. In
1846 there came to our ports, and by way of Canada, to this
country, 500,000 emigrants. In the present year, the number
will amount to at least 1,000,000! And if immigration continues
to increase at this ratio, how long will it be before the alien popu-
lation will exceed our own? Should we not be fearful of the
consequences? Does not history furnish us with some useful exam-
ples? Let us look back to the once famous republic of Switzerland;
let us reflect upon her fate when she threw open her gates for the
admission of the people of other nations. From that moment
may the story of her decline be dated. Soon the star of her
greatness, which had so long culminated in northern Europe,
begins to decline, until finally it disappeared beneath the horizon.
Aye — the once proud mistress of the Adriatic — she whose ships
went forth to every port — whose citizens were called the bankers
of the world; whose merchants were princes; whose winged lion
of St. Marks had flaunted to the breeze of every clime, fell, in
consequence of the admission of a foreign population. Had Rome
in the days of her imperial greatness been content with her own
citizens, Attila would never have thundered at the gates of the
"Eternal City."

We should ponder over these things, and if we are not too self-
willed to derive instruction from the experience of past nations, I

594 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

think we cannot fail to be convinced that we have a little some-
thing to fear, should this immense amount of foreigners be
permitted to vote without first swearing allegiance to our
government.

It has been said by the gentleman from Massac that most of
the emigrants that come here, are well prepared to immediately
become good citizens; that they are well informed as to the nature
of our government, and to the duties and privileges of its citizens;
that they are wealthy, and that they are a desirable class of popu-
lation. Sir, I will point him to a single State — to the State of
Massachusetts. And I refer to that State because I am more famil-
iar with the condition of her affairs than any other State excepting
our own. What does the gentleman suppose that that State pays
yearly for the support of her foreign pauper population; — she
pays about seventy thousand dollars — being not more than five or
ten thousand dollars less than the expense of her State govern-
ment. Is this a population of such a character as we would wish to
have come here^ I believe not. I do not mean to be understood
as asserting that they are all of this description. I am only en-
deavoring to show what may be the result of the admission of the
multitudes who are fleeing from the oppression which they experi-
ence in the nations of Europe — who are fleeing from starvation and
tyranny, and fastening themselves upon us. Well, sir, if the
little State of Massachusetts, not more than one-tenth part as
large in territorial extent as the State we live in, has to pay the
sum of seventy thousand dollars for the support of foreign paupers,
what must the State of New York pay? — and what must the State
of Illinois eventually be obliged to pay for their support? Sir,
the Atlantic States will not always retain these masses of foreign
paupers. The time will come, when tired of supporting them,
they will pay the expense of their transportation to our western
prairies. They will fasten themselves upon us, and after one
year's residence they are to be permitted to go to the polls and
to cast their votes in competition with our own citizens, even
while sucking from us the life blood of our bosoms. A million of
emigrants in one year coming to this country? Why, sir, in five
years, at this ratio, there will be an accession to the foreign popu-
lation which are now within our borders, equal to one-fifth of the

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 595

whole present population of the United States. By that time
there will, in all probability, be within this State a number of
foreign voters equal to the native voters; and these men in one
year are to be permitted (all uninformed and unprepared as they
are to give their votes knowingly and discreetly), to go to the
polls with citizens, and exercise the privilege of the elective fran-
chise. Is this right? I ask you again, sir, are we not making this
privilege too cheap? Are we not making it so cheap, that soon
it will not be worth possessing? If you make no distinction as to
voting, between him who was born upon a foreign soil, and him
who was born upon American soil, will it any longer be considered
a privilege to have been born an American? Sir, I was early
taught to believe that he who was born an American had some
privileges above the rest of mankind. I have been taught that
ours was a free government, a government of equal rights; btit it
seems, sir, from what we have heard on the floor of this conven-
tion, that the right of the citizen is to be disregarded, trampled
upon — that aliens are to be put over our heads, and that those of
us who have been so unfortunate as to draw our first breath in
this country, are to surrender up every right that we have fondly
fancied we possessed, and quietly submit to the intrusions of a
set of men imbued with foreign prejudices and foreign feelings.

Mr. Chairman: the gentleman from Massac asks the ques-
tion, how it is possible that those who have taken a solemn oath
to support the constitution of the United States, can vote in favor
of the proposition that those aliens who shall be entitled to a vote
at the time that the constitution, we are now framing, shall be
adopted, shall be permitted to continue the exercise of the elective
franchise, without being subjected to the same conditions that
are imposed upon those foreigners who shall come to our State
after the adoption of the new constitution? I will endeavor to
answer that question. Sir, I had no part in framing the old con-
stitution of this State; no man who is a member of this convention
was a member of that body that framed our first constitution.
The constitution went forth to the people; it was sanctioned by
them; it thus became the organic law of the land; but rights were
acquired under it; and I sincerely believe that those rights are in-
alienable and immutable, and I should be doing that which I

596 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

never mean to do, and which in my heart I believe to be wrong,
if I should lend my aid to suppress rights now existing in framing
a new organic law. For one, I shall never give my consent, or
my sanction, to an ex post facto law. The ruined credit and blight-
ed prosperity of our State, speaks in thunder tones to those mem-
bers of a past legislature who attempted such an innovation.
It is no part of our duty to encroach upon rights acquired, or to
affect the privileges of foreigners who have come into this State
with the expectation of enjoying such privileges as they should
acquire under the law of the land. It would be morally as well
as politically wrong to deprive them of rights obtained, and which
they were entitled to enjoy under the organic law that existed
when they came into the State. I have another objection to offer
to the amendment now under discussion, — permitting foreigners to
vote after a residence in this State of two years; but I approach
this part of the subject with fear and trembling; and how can it
be otherwise. The gentleman from Jefferson, a few days since,
in the plentitude of his legal knowledge, said that there was no
man in this convention could bring forward a single constitutional
argument against any State permitting foreigners to vote when-
ever they pleased. This is high ground; but the alien champion
has taken it, and how well he has maintained it, is not for me at
this time to say. If he can measure men's minds, and compre-
hend their thoughts, even before they are uttered, truly he is
possessed of most wonderful gifts.

It is, if we believe at all in the constitution of the United
States, in my opinion, in direct collision with one of its articles for
a State to permit an alien to vote until that alien should have
become naturalized. The framers of our time-honored and
revered constitution, were men of learning, patriotism, integrity.
They had no sinister views to accomplish. Their deliberations
were the deliberations of sturdy and inflexible patriots. The
deliberations of men framing an organic law for a mighty nation.
True, that nation was then, comparatively, but upon the thresh-
hold of being. It was in one sense, but an infant in its swaddling
clothes — and most dearly did that noble land love that infant.
There were no mock caresses there. They acted, not only for the
generation that then lived, but for the coming generations that

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 597

should float adown the tide of time. The spirit of demagogism
was hushed in that body — or rather, it was not permitted to in-
trude itself among them. A high, a holy, a generous desire to
make us a great and a good people — to dispense equal rights and
equal justice, as well to him who should dwell by the frozen streams
of the Kennebec and Penobscot, as to him who should dwell on
the sunny banks of the St. Mary's, was uppermost in their patriot
bosoms.

Among other articles incorporated in the constitution of the
United States, we find one requiring an uniform system of natural-
ization in all the States of the Union. Why was this? Had it no
import? Has it no meaning? If it was the intention of the
framers of the constitution of the United States, to permit the
various States to regulate the time when aliens should be per-
mitted to vote, why should the provisions I have referred to been
incorporated into the constitution? Did they intend an alien
should vote before he became a citizen? Did they intend that
soon after they had freed themselves from a foreign bondage, that
an alien should come to our shores, and before he became a citizen
exercise one of the dearest privileges of an American freeman?
If that was their intention, why did they couch that provision in
such ambiguous language? For it does appear to me, that if they
intended to leave it to the States to regulate the qualifications, as
to time, of their alien voters, that their language is exceedingly
dark and very ambiguous; very different from the clear and lucid
language, and evident intention, that is found in every other part
of that sacred instrument. I can have but one opinion respecting
the intention and the meaning of that clause of the constitution;
and that is, that no alien in any of the States should be permitted
to vote until he has become naturalized. If it were otherwise,
would not a right so fraught with consequences, either for good
or evil, as the elective franchise is, been further explained. Would
there not a following clause have been inserted giving to the States
the power to regulate the qualifications of their foreign voters?
At the time of the formation of the constitution of the United
States, the tide of emigration was setting with a strong and rapid
current towards this our Western continent. The dynasties, the
corruptions of the old world, were falling into disrepute. Many

598 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

there were who sought our western shores to become a part and a
portion of our new experiment. Our Fathers did not wish nor
desire that these soldiers of fortune should partake of, and immedi-
ately become connected with our government, — not at least until
they have been put upon trial; and then when their term of appren-
ticeship should have expired; when they had demeaned themselves
as good citizens; when they had sworn to renounce all allegiance
to foreign potentates, princes and powers; to support the consti-
tution of the United States — they were to be received into Holy
Brotherhood of American freemen — enjoying all their rights, and
partaking of all their privileges and immunities. Can anyone
seriously suppose, when he looks back to the period of the forma-
tion of our constitution, when he makes himself familiar with the
history of those times, that it is not a violation both of the spirit
and the meaning of the constitution of the United States to permit
aliens to vote until they have become naturalized? Ours is the
only State in the Union, I believe, that permits it.

If this is so, are we not committing a wrong upon other States?
We have the illustrious example of older States before us. Does
it not become us, then, as one of the younger branches of the
great confederacy, to pay at least a decent respect to long estab-
lished precedents?

Mr. Chairman, the time may come when the vote of the State
of Illinois will determine the election of President and Vice Presi-
dent of the United States, and the unnaturalized alien may deter-
mine the majority of this State. If such an event should ever
happen, would not our sister States have great and good reasons
to complain to us? Would they not say, and with justice, too,
that the votes of the Union had been disregarded, and men owing
no allegiance to our government had been permitted to elect two
of the highest dignitaries of our land? If such a circumstance
should ever transpire, would it not redound to the disadvantage
of the alien ? We all know that during a Presidential contest there
are high hopes and wild excitement in every bosom. Men's pas-
sions are aroused, their energies awakened. The spirit of con-
quest is with them. If then the alien votes of Illinois should ever
defeat any party in such a contest, I ask again, would it not be
worse for the alien ? Would not those who by their means have

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 599

been defeated in their wishes strive to put aliens upon a longer
period of probation ? And would not the chances be that the law
would be altered; that ten, fifteen, or twenty years would be sub-
stituted in place of five?

Sir, ours is an elective government; and being an elective gov-
ernment, in whom resides, and to whom is given the elective
franchise? Is it not vested in the people? Did it not originate in
them? If this be true, the elective franchise is a sovereign power,
and should not be trusted with, aye, it cannot be conferred upon
any person but a citizen of the United States.

A republican government like ours, diflTers from the govern-
ments of the old world. There, in many of their governments
the king frames their constitution and enacts their laws, — or at
least they are the offspring of his recommendation. Ours is a
self-constituted government — a political corporation, whose con-
stitution was the work of the people, and their posterity the
members of the corporation. After this corporation has gone
into existence, can an alien become a member of it at his will?
Must there not be two contracting parties? Have not the mem-
bers of that corporation a voice in the matter? Can an alien join
them, or force himself into their midst without some express agree-
ment on their part to receive him? Is there any way by which an
alien can engage his allegiance to this country, and be favorably
received by it, except by naturalization? Then, should he be
allowed to vote before he becomes a citizen? Never! sir; never!
Reason, common sense, sound policy, the express will of the
general government, all forbid it, imperatively forbid it. And I
do say, sir, from the love I have for that class of our population —
for I have many friends among them — that it is for their interest,
for our interest, for the interest of us all, that they should be
naturalized before they are permitted to enjoy the privileges of
the elective franchise.

As I am aware, Mr. Chairman, that the committee is some-
what exhausted, I shall not pursue this argument as far as I origi-
nally intended. I shall, however briefly notice some of the remarks
that fell from the lips of gentlemen upon this floor, and then leave
the subject to be disposed of by the committee. There was a
remark made by the gentleman from Cook, sir, that I cannot

6oo ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

pass over in silence. The gentleman asserted that those of us who
were in favor of requiring the alien to become naturalized, before
he should be entitled to exercise the privilege of the elective
franchise, were acting more harshly towards the emigrant than
George III did towards the American colonies. Sir, there is a
part of my being that allows of no contradiction. I love my
country; I love her laws; I love her institutions; and I am ready
at all times, and upon all occasions, to peril the last drop of my
heart's blood in defense of them. Sir, the heritage of freedom
was mine; upon her holy altars my infancy was consecrated; and
I shall cling to those altars so long as this heart continues to beat;
as long as the purple current shall circulate through my veins.
My eyes were first opened upon this free soil; and I trust in God
that when they shall be closed forever they shall be closed upon
the same broad domain. Sir, the remark of the gentleman from
Cook was unkind. I am no tenant by sufferance. I need no
teachings in the school of republicanism. If I ever should, I wish
to exercise a freeman's privilege, and select a master for myself.
And when I do make the selection, it shall be one whose early
devotions were offered up at the shrine of freedom; not one in
whose bosom more strongly glides the spirit of demagogism
than that of American patriotism. Sir, in passing, I will allude
to another remark of the gentleman from Cook. It was this:
' 'ought you not to hang your heads for very shame, to advocate
such doctrines as you do?" And this addressed to American
citizens, and one of them my venerable friend from Tazewell, who
has stood up here in his place, with his head sprinkled o'er with the
frosts of many winters, and frankly and freely declared his senti-
ments; sentiments emanating from a heart purely American;
from a heart responding to no tones but the tones of patriotism;
and he is asked to hang his head in shame! And by whom?
By a boy — a very stripling — who, according to his own acknowl-
edgment, is but thirteen! — but thirteen, as far as his knowledge
of the institutions of this country is concerned. He dictating to
an honorable — respectable — venerable — American citizen! !

Shall I, too, hang my head for very shame, for daring here, in
the hall of this Convention, to utter my opinions regarding the
countrymen of the gentleman from Cook, or even my own country-

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 6ci

men? No, sir. I fear him not. I fear neither his hordes or his
clans; — nor did I ever fear; and, I trust in God, I never shall,
that fiery spirit of demagogism that breathes in every sentiment
he has uttered. American citizens to hang their heads for shame,
for daring here, in an assembly of the people's representatives, to
advocate what they honestly believe to be just and right! O,
how exceedingly modest it was in the young man! ! ! Sir, had I
been placed in his situation, I would sooner have burned my right
arm off to the very shoulder, than to have uttered such a senti-
ment in the presence of a free people. Nor did my worthy friend
from Tazewell escape scot-free from other gentlemen, in this
debate. The little state of Rhode Island seems to have been the
target set up to be shot at, by the petty marksmen of the opposi-
tion. And my venerable friend from Tazewell appears to have been
the bull's-eye at which they have aimed their shafts of vitupera-
tion. But they have all fallen harmless at his feet. Sir, allow
me to allude, for a moment, to the attack made upon that little
state, and her own ' 'bald eagle,' ' in the halls of Congress. There
was a time when the bird-hawks of that body made a simultaneous
dash, at the old "bald eagle" of Rhode Island. The marks of
that eagle's talons, and the impression made by the stroke of his
wings, they will carry with them to their graves. Cambreleng,
and Wickliffe, and Daniel, will remember, to the latest period of
their lives, the withering satire with which their ungenerous
attack was repulsed. Mr. Chairman, there are miniature Cam-
brelengs, and WicklifFes and Daniels in this Convention. And
when, on the other day, an attack was made upon Rhode Islan^,
and upon my venerable friend from Tazewell, I could not help
wishing that Tristram Burgess could have been here, to defend
his little state. I know my worthy friend from Tazewell has all
the spirit, and at least a portion of the power of his ancient friend,
to do it; — but his hands are tied; he is bound by the ligaments of
our holy religion. He will not

— stoop, from his pride of place.
To hawk at mousing owls.
There is another remark of the gentleman from Cook, that
deserves a passing notice. It is this: "The natural tendency of
the Americans is towards aristocracy, and they need an infusion

6o2 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of foreign blood in their veins to preserve its purity." This is a
strange and a bold doctrine; and yet he has asserted it upon the au-
thority of the sage of Lindenwold! I will not undertake to deny
that Mr. Van Buren has uttered such a sentiment; I can only say
that I never heard of it before. And if Mr. Van Buren has used
such language, he has certainly departed from that usual shrewd-
ness which he has always had the credit of possessing.

We, the descendants of those men who passed through the
storms of the Revolution; — who have, ourselves, experienced
darkness and shadows, as well as somewhat of sunshine; — we
unable to maintain the purity of our institutions? JVe obliged to
procure assistance from the broken systems of Europe, and to
imbibe a portion of the spirit of those who cringe, and fawn, about
the thrones of the Old Continent, to bolster up the tottering
fabric of our Government! What man, who has always been a
republican, can submit, quietly and tamely, to be told, that, in
order to perpetuate our institutions, it is necessary an infusion of
foreign blood should be thrown into our veins? — that our blood
should be mingled with that which circulates in the veins of a
corrupt nobility, or their born and willing serfs, in order that our
free government may be sustained? What, is there not purity
sufficient in the blood that flows in Aynerican veins to preserve,
untarnished, our own free constitution? — to protect it from the
encroachments of American aristocracy? Sir, I do not say that
the expression the gentleman from Cook attributes to Mr. Van
Buren is a forgery; I only say that I never heard of it before. Let
it pass for its true value. There are many other remarks of the
gentleman from Cook that I should be glad to correct, but I have
no time to do so now. I will pass to the gentleman from Brown.
A day or two since, he gave us a long historical dissertation. I
was somewhat amused, and instructed also, with the legendary
lore which he so profusely scattered among us. Certainly, he is
entitled to great credit for his historical researches, and his accu-
rate information. All must admit that he has made discoveries
that no one else ever dreamed of. When I heard the gentleman
declare that the feudal system originated among the Romans, I
confess I was somewhat startled at the profundity of his knowl-
edge, and his penetrating shrewdness. I would like, however, to

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 603

be informed by the gentleman under which of the Roman Emperors
it was that the feudal system was instituted; or, if it might not
have been instituted by him who was called "the noblest Roman
of them all?" There is another observation of the gentleman
from Brown, that claims a momentary notice. He said, in com-
menting upon the acute and astute remarks of the gentleman
from Cook, that he (the gentleman from Cook) had enjoyed higher
privileges than those that belong to a native American citizen, for
the reason that he had been born in another clime, and upon
another soil. If the gentleman from Brown considered this a
higher privilege, he is welcome to enjoy it.

A plain republican soil, and the sun that shines and the stars
that glisten upon that soil, are good enough for me, sir. It was
upon a republican soil that I was born. I ask no purer earth to
cover my bosom, when the spirit shall have departed from my
body. A higher birth! Is there a higher heritage that God's
sun ever shone upon, than that of an American freeman? Would
we barter it for the privilege of being born under the dominion of
principalities and thrones? No, sir; the American whose bosom
is imbued with the spirit of patriotism — who loves his country as
he should love it — asks no prouder heritage, requires no nobler
privilege, than to live and die in the land of his birth. If the fancy
and imagination of the gentleman from Brown still lingers around
the crumbling dynasties of the old world, let him go there — God
speed him! We can spare him.

Sir, I have a word of reply to the argument of the other gentle-
man from Cook; — I mean the gentleman from Cook. He asserted
that two-thirds of our standing army was composed of foreigners.
In time of peace, it may be so; and I think this fact, sir, a high
compliment to American freemen. My countrymen are unwilling
to enter the regular army in time of peace; they have higher and
nobler avocations to perform; — those, more consonant with the
spirit and genius of an enlightened patriotism. They are engaged
in developing the resources of our common country; in agricultural,
mercantile, and manufacturing transactions. They are better
employed than they would be in shouldering a musket and march-
ing through our towns and cities, to the music of the fife and drum.
In time of peace, to the enterprising citizen, the regular army has

6o4 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

no charms, or inducements; an active, striving, useful life, is a
part of his being. Not so with many of the aliens. They come
among us without any particular fixed principles; they have no
chart to guide or to govern them. In the land of their birth, the
discipline of the army, was perchance their familiar employment,
accustomed to its idleness, they soon seek, after their arrival, the
privilege of again partaking of their favorite indulgence; and if
the trumpet of war should call them to the field, they fight, but
they fight mechanically, unsupported by those feelings that in-
fluence the citizens that battle for home and for freedom. They
may fight, but they fight as the men of Hesse Cassel did, during
our revolution, for pay, simply for their eight dollars per month.
It is not so with our volunteer aliens, they stand in our ranks,
shoulder to shoulder, with our citizens, and they seek the war,
not for war's sake, but for the love they bear their adopted country.
Sir, were they all foreigners that fought the battles of Palo Alto,
and Resaca de la Palma? Those battles were won by our regular
army, and the most of those men who battled there were our own
countrymen.

The gentleman also says, that the flag of our merchant ships,
and our navy, is borne to every clime, by ships manned by foreign-
ers. Sir, has it come to this, are we so weak, so pitiful, so con-
temptible, that we have to procure aliens to bear the stars and
stripes, aye, and sustain their honor too, in foreign ports? Let
him turn his vision to the Pacific ocean, methinks, he would see,
if he should so do, some few scattering ships, riding upon her
stormy billows. Who mans those ships? Are their crews com-
posed of foreigners? Or rather are they not composed of such
men as manned the frigate Constitution during the last war;
ever ready to fight as long as a single plank of the ship that bears
them remains above water? Sir, did aliens carry our flag abroad
during the last war with England; or was it done by the masters
and sailors of our whaling and coasting ships? These were the
men who, when the tocsin of war sounded in our ears, were
selected to sustain the honor, and the glory of our navy. These
were the men who manned the decks of the glorious old Constitu-
tion, and with their colors nailed to the mast-head, roamed over
every ocean. With the stars and the stripes floating over them.

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 605

they everywhere sought the British Cruisers; and in the smoke of
battle, while the dead were around them, while the shrieks of the
wounded were ringing in their ears, they thought but of their
country, their noble ship, and the proud flag that was flying over
them. It was to men like these, the destinies of that gallant ship
was entrusted. Before they would have surrendered to their foe,
they would have gone down, frigate, crew, flag and all; to those
depths that know no sounding. Such are the men, sir, that have
given character, and tone, and immortality to our navy. And, sir,
it will be to men such as these, born upon our own soil; from the
cradle familiar with the ocean, to whom her honor, and fame, will
be entrusted, if again Britannia should strive to rule the ocean.

The gentleman from Jo Daviess told us yesterday, that when
a charge was to be made upon an enemy, foreigners were the men
selected by our officers to make it? Ah! it pains me much to hear
an enlightened gentleman, in a deliberative assembly of a country
claiming to be the birth-place of freedom, promulgating to the
world, that our success in arms, depends, not upon our own brav-
ery, but upon the skill and courage of men of other lands.

Perhaps the sentiment announced by the gentleman from Jo
Daviess, may go abroad. It may be copied into the London and
Paris Journals, that the late Secretary of the State of Illinois, did
admit in his place, upon the floor of this convention, that when a
daring charge was to be made upon an enemy, we did not depend
upon ourselves, but depended upon foreigners to accomplish it.
A pretty commentary this would be upon our native courage. I
will ask the gentleman, if his conscience will permit him, thus to
desecrate the memory of those of our countrymen, who have
achieved a victory, whenever an enemy has been met, upon the
plains [of] Mexico? If he would desecrate the memories of those
gallant spirits, who have poured out their life blood in fighting the
battles of their country? If he would desecrate the memory of
the gallant Hardin, whose obsequies a few short days ago we
witnessed? I think I could name some, sir, who at Buena Vista,
charged the enemy tolerably well, although they were not foreign-
ers. Sir, did foreigners fight the battle of Bunker's Hill? Was
it not fought by men who left their ploughs standing in their own
native fields, and rushed with true American courage to the

6o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

desperate battle? Who, sir, strewed the road from Concord to
Boston, with the best blood of English chivalry? They were
men, high-minded men, natives of the land for whom they fought,
"who knew their rights, and knowing dared maintain them."
Who charged the Hessians at Bennington? Were they foreigners;
or were they the sturdy mountaineers of Vermont and New Hamp-
shire, who with their own stalwart arms, dealt death at every blow?
Sir, it is in vain for gentlemen to talk to us, of the superiority of
foreign courage, over that of our own. So to talk, is unworthy
the character of a high-minded and intelligent statesman.

Sir, it has been told to us, during this debate, that Wither-
spoone, Morris, Braxton, and others foreigners, supported the
Declaration of our Independence; that great charter of our liber-
ties. True, they did so, and I ask you, sir, if they did not when
they signed that instrument, pledge their lives, their fortunes, and
their sacred honor, to its support; could there be a higher degree
of naturalization than this? Sir, was it not one of those
kinds of naturalization that immediately emanates from the throne
of Deity itself? The highest that is given to sublunary mortals.
Sir, there have been wise and patriotic foreigners, who have made
this country their own by adoption; and there will always be
great and good men of other nations, settling among us. But let
us remember that we are now framing an organic law, that may
last for centuries. And that while there may be many good,
some bad men will come to our country. Let us require of them
to linger a while upon our shores before they are permitted to
partake of the privileges of the elective franchise.

One word more in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, and I will cease
to trouble the committee. It was said by the gentleman from
Brown, that it was by chance we were born here. That the same
chance might have directed our birth to have taken place in
Africa. It is evident to me that I could not very well have been
born a negro, or if I had been, I think I could have said, with a
great degree of propriety, that it would have been a hundred
dollars in my pocket, if I never had been born.

Mr. Chairman, I am no believer in the doctrine of chance.
Was it by chance, sir, that our Puritan Fathers left the green hill-
sides of their native home, the chalky cliffs of old Albion, to wor-

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 607

ship their God according to the dictates of their own consciences,
in the morasses, and amid the pestilential fogs of Holland? Was
it by chance they embarked at Delfthousen; the forlorn hope of a
mighty world, cabined and confined in two vessels? Was it by
chance they wended their cheerless way through the storms and
winds of the ocean, to a wild and unbroken wilderness? In that
wilderness to encounter the snow wreaths, and unpitying blasts
of winter, and the scorching sun and remorseless pestilence of
summer; the tomahawk, and the scalping knife of the red savage;
continued hardship, and grim and unrelenting famine? Was it
by chance that from a little band of about one hundred Puritans
sprung up a population of three millions of souls; ready to declare
themselves free and independent? Was it by chance that when
they found oppression and kingly tyranny following them to
their new home, that they were ready to resist it even to the death?
Was it by chance they endured the horrors of war through a period
of deep and dark distress; and eventually came out from the
struggle, bearing aloft the magnificent charter of our freedom,
wet with the blood of our sires; that charter won by stern courage
at the cannon's mouth, by the bayonet's point? Was it by chance
that from three millions, we now number twenty millions? No,
no, no. It was by the fiat of the eternal God. By that fiat
of Him who unrolled yonder blue scroll, and wrote upon its high
frontispiece, the legible gleamings of immortality. By that fiat
of Him who paints the bow of promise amid banners of storms;
and unchains the lightnings, that linger, and lurk, and play, and
flash, amid the gloom. It was the fiat of Him who gave to the
Leviathan his home, deep in the unsounded bosom of the ocean;
and hangs out the stars that deck the dewy brow of night. It
was the fiat of Him who gave to the Eagle his eyrie, high up amid
the mountain storm; and to the dove, her tranquil home, in the
woods, that echo to the minstrelsy of her moans.]

Mr. WHITESIDE rose, not to detain the committee by a
speech, but as he had heard insinuations thrown out during the
debate against the intelligence of the framers of our present
constitution he desired to repel those insinuations. They were
men of good, sense and intelligence. Our state was settled by

6o8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

men who came here under the celebrated George Rogers Clark,
they it was who drove off the red men and cleared our woods of
the wild beast. The state was filled by men born in all countries.
That was the time when every man depended for his life on his
neighbor; and they asked not where he was born. In that hour of
danger the foreign settler was found to turn out as readily as
any other. A warm feeling for them grew up from that time,
and the same feeling towards them was felt by the framers of the
constitution, and the insinuation that those fathers of the state
knew not the difference between "citizen" and "inhabitant" is
false. I had a conversation with a gentleman from Kentucky,
who was the one who drew up that constitution, and when it was
first reported it contained "citizen" in it, but the old men of
Illinois struck it out. They did understand the meaning of the
word "inhabitant." He believed the people of his county were
in favor of allowing aliens to vote, provided they at the earliest
moment become citizens. With that view he had drawn up the
amendment that had been accepted by the member from St. Clair,
as a modification of his own. If any one after being here five
years will refuse to become a citizen, he was unworthy of being a
citizen. The great majority of them desire to become citizens
and do so, and are worthy of the privilege. That a bad man
could be occasionally found was not strange, and if the same rule
were applied and no Americans allowed to vote except those
who were worthy of the privilege, many would be excluded. He
run against such a one the other day, who said he hoped our
armies in Mexico might be defeated, and that a curse would fall
upon our nation. He hoped the amendment would be adopted.

And the committee divided on the amendment and it was
rejected — yeas 6i, nays 76.

Mr. MASON moved to amend so as to require an oath of alle-
giance &c., from those here now; which was rejected.

Messrs. Knox, Dawson and Mason offered amendments
proposing additional restrictions, and they were all rejected.

Sec. 2. All elections shall be by ballot.

Mr. BALLINGALL moved to add to the section— " provided
that the Legislature may change at any time the mode of voting
to viva voce."

THURSDAY, JULY 2q, 1847 609

Mr. KITCHELL opposed the amendment.

And the amendment was rejected.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to strike out the section. And
the motion was rejected.

Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were passed without amendment.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the committee rise and report the
article to the Convention without amendment. It is as follows:

Sec. I. In all elections every white male citizen, above the
age of twenty-one years, having resided in the state one year
next preceding any election, shall be entitled to vote at such
election; and every white male inhabitant of the age aforesaid,
who may be a resident of the state at the time of the adoption
of this constitution, shall have the right of voting as aforesaid;
but no such citizen or inhabitant shall be entitled to vote except
in the district or county in which he shall actually reside at the
time of such election.

Mr. SCATES moved to lay the article on the table, to be
taken up at a future time; which motion was decided in the
negative.

The question recurring on the adoption of the article —

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved it be voted on section by section;
which was agreed to.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to amend the first section by
inserting, &c. (The same amendment as proposed by Mr. Roman,
in committee, with the term changed to two years instead of
one.)

Mr. KITCHELL moved that the section and amendment be
passed over informally for the present. Rejected.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL moved the Convention adjourn. Decided
in the negative.

Mr. SCATES moved a call of the Convention.

Messrs. Servant, Geddes, Turnbull and others objected.
Upon a division, a call was ordered — yeas 70, nays 40.

The call was made, and all present except 15 members.

The question being on the amendment of Mr. Armstrong,
the yeas and nays were demanded and taken — yeas 66, nays 77.

The yeas and nays were as follows:

YEAS — Allen, Anderson, Archer, Armstrong, Atherton, Blair,

6io ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Blakely, Ballingall, Brockman, Bosbyshell, Brown, Bunsen,
Butler, Grain, Caldwell, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Campbell of
McDonough, Carter, F. S. Casey, Zadoc Casey, Colby, Cross of
Woodford, Cloud, Churchill, Davis of Massac, Dement, Dunlap,
Farwell, Green of Clay, Gregg, Hatch, Hayes, Heacock, Hender-
son, Hill, Hoes, Hogue, Hunsaker, James, Jenkins, Jones, Kreider,
Kinney of St. Clair, Kitchell, Lasater, Lenley, McClure, Manly,
Markley, Moffett, Morris, Nichols, Oliver, Pace, Robbins, Roman,
Rountree, Scates, Stadden, Sherman, Smith of Gallatin, Thomp-
son, Tutt, Vernor, Witt, Whiteside. — 66.

NAYS — Adams, Canady, Choate, Constable, Cross of Winne-
bago, Church, Dale, Davis of Montgomery, Davis of McLean,
Dawson, Deitz, Dummer, Dunn, Dunsmore, Edwards of Madison,
Edwards of Sangamon, Eccles, Evey, Frick, Graham, Geddes,
Green of Jo Daviess, Green of Tazewell, Grimshaw, Harding,
Harper, Harvey, Hay, Holmes, Hurlbut, Jackson, Judd, Knapp of
Jersey, Knapp of Scott, Kenner, Kinney of Bureau, Knowlton,
Knox, Lander, Lemon, Lockwood, Logan, McCallen, Marshall of
Coles, Marshall of Mason, Mason, Matheny, Mieure, Miller,
Minshall, Northcott, Palmer of Marshall, Pratt, Peters, Pinckney,
Rives, Robinson, Sharpe, Swan, Spencer, Servant, Sibley, Sim,
Simpson, Singleton, Smith of Macon, Thomas, Thornton, Turn-
bull, Turner, Tuttle, Vance, Webber, West, Williams, Whitney,
Woodson, Worcester. — 78.

Absent — Akin, Bond, Edmonson, Harlan, Hawley, Huston,
Laughlin, Loudon, McCuUy, McHatton, Moore, Norton, Palmer
of Macoupin, Powers, Shields, Shumway, Trower and Wead.

Mr. DALE, when called upon to vote, said that his own views
and sentiments were in favor of the amendment, but the people
of his county thought differently, and he regretted that he was
compelled to vote in the negative.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL offered the same amendment, with the
term changed to three years. And the vote being taken by yeas
and nays, resulted — yeas 67, nays 76, as follows:

YEAS — Allen, Anderson, Archer, Armstrong, Atherton, Blair,
Blakely, Ballingall, Brockman, Bosbyshell, Brown, Bunsen,
Butler, Grain, Caldwell, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Campbell of
McDonough, Carter, F. S. Casey, Zadoc Casey, Colby, Cross of

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 611

Woodford, Cloud, Churchill, Dale, Davis of Massac, Dement,
Dunlap, Farwell, Green of Clay, Gregg, Hatch, Hayes, Heacock,
Henderson, Hill, Hoes, Hogue, Hunsaker, James, Jenkins, Jones,
Kreider, Kinney of St. Clair, Kitchell, Lasater, Lenley, McClure,
Manly, Markley, Moffett, Morris, Nichols, Oliver, Pace, Robbins,
Roman, Rountree, Scates, Stadden, Sherman, Smith of Gallatin,
Thompson, Tutt, Vernor, Witt, Whiteside. — 67.

NAYS — Adams, Canady, Choate, Constable, Cross of Winne-
bago, Church, Davis of Bond, Davis of McLean, Dawson, Deitz,
Dummer, Dunn, Dunsmore, Edwards of Madison, Edwards of
Sangamon, Eccles, Evey, Frick, Graham, Geddes, Green of Jo
Daviess, Green of Tazewell, Grimshaw, Harding, Harper, Harvey,
Hay, Holmes, Hurlbut, Jackson, Judd, Knapp of Jersey, Knapp of
Scott, Kenner, Kinney of Bureau, Knowlton, Knox, Lander,
Lemon, Lockwood, Logan, McCallen, Marshall of Coles, Marshall
of Mason, Mason, Matheny, Mieure, Miller, Minshall, North-
cott, Palmer of Marshall, Pratt, Pinckney, Rives, Robinson,
Sharpe, Swan, Spencer, Servant, Sibley, Sim, Simpson, Singleton,
Smith of Macon, Thomas, Thornton, Turnbull, Turner, Tuttle,
Vance, Webber, West, Williams, Whitney, Woodson, Worcester —

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the previous question; which was
seconded.

The question being taken on the adoption of the section, it was
decided in the affirmative by yeas 82, nays 60.

The second section was then taken up, and

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the previous question.

Mr. ROBBINS opposed the previous question, as it cut off all
amendments, and excluded members from presenting the views
of their constituents, and having an expression of opinion upon
them.

Messrs. Ballingall and Kitchell opposed the previous
question on similar grounds.

And the Convention refused to second the demand.

Mr. ROBBINS offered an amendment — strike out all after
"elections," and insert, "until the legislature shall otherwise
provide, shall be viva voce."

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess opposed the amendment. The

6i2 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

time would come when Illinois would be a manufacturing state,
and he was in favor of the ballot system in order that every man
might vote his sentiments, uncontrolled by any moneyed or
employer's interest, as was the case at the east.

The question being taken, the amendment was lost.

Mr. DEMENT moved to add to the section, "until otherwise
provided by law." Rejected — yeas 63, nays 72.

The question on the adoption of the section was taken by
yeas and nays, and resulted yeas 96, nays 40. The 3d, 4th, 5th,
6th, and 7 th sections were adopted. The 8th section was read.

Mr. ADAMS moved to insert before "Monday," the words
"the first Tuesday after the first," in order that our elections
might all be held on one day — the day fixed for the presidential
elections.

A discussion all over the house ensued upon the point whether
that was the day fixed for holding the presidential election or not,
during which two motions to adjourn were made and decided in the
negative.

Leave was granted to the special committee of 27, on the
judiciary, to meet during the session of the Convention.

And without taking a vote on the amendment, the Convention
adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The question pending was on Mr. Adams' amendment, and it
was carried.

Mr. HARVEY moved to strike out "biennally;" which motion
was rejected.

Mr. THOMAS moved to add to the section, "until otherwise
provided for by law." And the vote being taken resulted —
yeas 67, nays 15. No quorum voting.

A call of the Convention was ordered and made, and no
members answered to their names. The question was again
taken and no quorum voted. A third vote was taken and no
quorum voted.

Mr. Z. CASEY called for the yeas and nays, and they were
ordered and taken. And the amendment was adopted — yeas 72,
nays 50.

And the section, as amended, was adopted.

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1847 613

Mr. WOODSON moved the article be referred to the committee
of Revision, &c. Carried.

Mr. THOMAS moved the Convention resolve itself into
committee of the whole and take up the report of the committee
on the Militia; which was agreed to, and Mr. Thomas was called
to the chair.

The report of the majority of the committee (the 5th article
of the present constitution, without any amendment) was taken
up.

Sections one, two and three were agreed to, without amend-
ment.

Sec. 4. Brigadier and major generals shall be elected by the
officers of the brigades and divisions, respectively.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to strike out "officers of" and insert
"persons composing."

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to insert — to meet the
views of his friend from Hardin— after the proposed amendment,
the words "except foreigners;" and the motion was rejected.

The question being taken on the first amendment, it was also
rejected.

Sec. 5. All militia officers shall be commissioned by the Gov-
ernor, and may hold their commissions for such time as the Legis-
lature may provide.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey moved to strike out the [proposed] sec-
tion, and insert: "all militia officers shall be commissioned by the
Governor, and may hold their commissions for such time as the
Legislature may provide."

And the same was adopted.

Mr. McCALLEN offered, as an additional section, the follow-
ing: "All persons who shall enroll themselves into volunteer
companies, uniform, equip, and hold themselves in readiness for
service, shall be exempt from serving on juries, and paying a
capitation tax for road purposes."

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to insert after "all
persons," "except foreigners." Lost.

Mr. KITCHELL moved to strike out the exemption from
jury service. Carried.

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to strike out the

6i4 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

exemption from the capitation tax for road purposes; and the
same was rejected.

The question was taken on the proposed section, and it was
rejected.

The committee rose and reported the article, with the amend-
ment, to the Convention. And the question being taken on con-
curring with the amendment, it was decided in the affirmative.

Mr. HARDING moved to add to the article, "all persons
shall be exempt from military duty in time of peace, except to
repel invasion and suppress insurrection, by paying a tax of fifty
cents per annum, for the use of volunteer companies, to be dis-
tributed according to law."

Messrs. Armstrong, Brockman and Singleton opposed
the amendment, and Messrs. McCallen and Geddes supported it
and the question being taken thereon, the amendment was re-
jected.

The article was then adopted as a part of the new constitution;
and it was referred to the committee on Revision, &c.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

XLII. FRIDAY, JULY 30, 1847

Mr. MARSHALL of Mason presented a petition, praying
the appointment of a state superintendent of schools; which was
referred to the committee on Education.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the Convention resolve itself into com-
mittee of the whole on the report of the committee on Revenue;
which motion was concurred in, and Mr. Edwards of Sangamon
in the Chair.

Sec. I. The Legislature shall cause to be collected from all
free white male inhabitants of this state, over the age of twenty-one
years and under the age of sixty years, a capitation tax of not less
than fifty cents nor more than one dollar each, to be applied yearly
to the payment of the interest due and to become due from this
state to the school, college, and seminary funds; and if in any
year there shall remain any balance of said tax, after the payment
of interest due for that year, such balance shall be paid into the
state treasury.

Mr. ARCHER moved to strike out "shall," in the first line,
and insert "may." Such was, said Mr. A., the instructions to
the committee.

Mr. GREGG said, he sincerely hoped the amendment would
prevail, as he believed it would be both impolitic and unjust to
provide for a permanent poll tax in the constitution. There
was no objection, in his opinion, to leaving the matter in the
hands of the General Assembly, for the people would then have
the control over it. Their representatives might provide in a
single instance for such a tax, but public opinion would thereafter
check, all such legislation.

A capitation tax was unjust to two classes in the community —
to the laborers of the State — those who earned their daily bread
by the sweat of their brows — and to the farmers of small means,
who were just commencing their improvements, and needed every
thing they could earn to pay taxes upon their little property, and
support their families.

615

6i6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Property was the only fit and appropriate basis ot taxation —
those who had the wealth of the country ought to pay its pecuniary
burdens. It was not true that the poorer classes paid no equiva-
lent for the protection they enjoyed. Did they not sit upon
juries, work upon roads, and do service in the militia? Did they
not, upon every occasion of danger, rally in defence of the country,
fight our battles, and freely shed their blood in sustaining the
national honor? Was not the property of the country, in times
of war or domestic disturbance, protected by the strong arms of
the poorer classes of [the] community?

A provision for a permanent poll tax would create an element
of opposition to the new constitution which could not well be
overcome. The people would readily appreciate its gross injus-
tice, and spurn the instrument that gave it sanction.

Entertaining these views, he felt it his duty to oppose stren-
uously every effort to provide for the imposition of a poll tax. In
these times of boasted "progression" there was little propriety in
taking up the discarded maxims of aristocracy and engrafting
them upon our system. There was no occasion for attempting to
fasten upon the people an unjust, oppressive, anti-republican bur-
den. In this light would a poll tax be regarded, and justly
regarded. Public interest, public policy, and public justice were
alike opposed to it. Immigration to our state should be encour-
aged, and not repelled. — The effect of a poll tax would be to drive
away all those who were able to appreciate unnecessary and unwise
exactions. After further remarks sustaining the same view, Mr.
G. concluded by asking the Convention to pause before they
adopted a policy which the people would repudiate, and which
they ought to repudiate.

Mr. WHITNEY concurred with the views expressed by the
gentleman from Cook. He would vote for the amendment.

Mr. PETERS was opposed to the amendment. He was in
favor of a poll tax upon grounds of justice and equal taxation.
Persons were as proper a subject of taxation as property, and
should be made to contribute towards the expenses of the govern-
ment. We were all protected — the landholder and the non land-
holder— with equal care by the laws and the government, and
should pay our share towards its support.

FRIDAY, JULY 30, i847 617

Mr. TURNBULL said, this matter had been discussed so
long and so thoroughly when last before the Convention, that he
did not think we should enter again on the subject. He suggested
that the amendment be withdrawn for the present, and offered
when the subject was reported back to the Convention.

Mr. CALDWELL differed from the gentleman last up. He
hoped discussion would be had and had now upon the subject.
When the resolution of instructions to the committee passed this
Convention, he understood it as containing a different principle
from that contained in this section reported by the committee.
The resolution left with the Legislature a discretionary power to
pass such a law; this report makes it obligatory upon them, and it
also directs that the money shall be applied to a special and partic-
ular object. He hoped discussion would open, that debate would
be allowed, and that members would now proceed with a considera-
tion of the subject. For one, he had voted for the resolution ot
instruction, but he would vote against the section as reported, for
the latter makes it obligatory upon the Legislature to pass this
law, and applies the tax to be raised to a specific purpose, which
the people of this state will never allow.

Mr. SHERMAN said, he was in favor of the amendment,
because it would leave the question of a poll tax with the people,
to be adopted by their representatives. He feared that we were
inserting too many "shalls" in the constitution. The people
might at some time be willing to have a poll tax, but not at present.
He was for leaving with the Legislature the power to pass the law
or to repeal it, to meet the wishes of the people.

Mr. THOMAS was in favor of the poll tax, and opposed to the
amendment. He desired the section to remain as it was. By it
the money raised was to be applied to the payment of our school
debt, which was as much a public debt as any other. It was also
intended as a substitute for the road labor, which, in many parts
of the state, was not as necessary now as heretofore. Every state
in the Union had a poll tax except one, and that was Illinois, and
its justice was admitted by all. Persons, he considered, should be
taxed as well as property, for they were equally protected by the
laws and government.

Mr. ADAMS was in favor of a poll tax, but opposed to any

6i8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

permanent provision in the constitution. He would vote for the
amendment.

Mr. CHURCHILL was opposed to a capitation tax. It was
unjust. We, by it, professedly propose to make taxation equal.
By it we did not arrive at that effect. We oppressed the lower
classes and relieved the upper ranks — if we struck a line at ?5,
we oppress the lower classes, but relieve the higher. Most of our
taxes was collected from the laboring community, and he opposed
any additional burden upon them.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that he was in favor of a
poll tax, but would vote for the amendment. He said the section
would, when amended, read as the committee had been instructed
to report, by the following resolution passed on the 17th of June:

"Resolved, That the committee on Revenue be, and they are
hereby, instructed to report an amendment to the constitution
so as to authorize the Legislature to levy a capitation tax, not to
exceed one dollar, on all free white male inhabitants over the age
of twenty-one years, when they shall deem it necessary."

Mr. MINSHALL was in favor of giving the Legislature power
to levy a poll tax, but opposed to any imperative provision. He
had voted for the resolution of instruction on this ground. No
state had an imperative provision that it shall be levied. Some
states said that the legislature may levy such a tax; others con-
nected it with the right of suffrage, and in three states it was
repudiated as unjust. He would vote for the amendment.

Mr. BUTLER said, that at a first view of the question he was
in favor of the proposition, but upon reflection, had come to the
conclusion that a poll tax was unjust, and oppressive upon the
laboring classes. Therefore, he should oppose the section, and
oppose giving the Legislature any such power. He would vote
to strike the section out.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall advocated the poll tax, as a proper
and just tax. There were many in the state who had no property,
lived as well as all others, and were protected in their persons by
our government, yet paid nothing towards paying the expenses.
Suppose the state had no property, would not there be a manifest
necessity in taxing persons? This is the ground he took before
his people, and they elected him over his competitor, who took a

FRIDAY, JULY 30, i847 619

different view of the question. He would like the tax to be fixed
at one dollar, and that the section authorizing it should be sub-
mitted to the people for a vote separately from the constitution
itself.

Mr. JONES said, the word "shall" was in both the majority
and minority reports. He did not know whether the resolution
was before them or not when the section was written; he was
satisfied that the committee intended to obey the instruction.
He had voted against the resolution, because he was opposed to
a poll tax at all. He would vote for the motion to strike out.

Mr. KITCHELL was in favor of the poll tax as just, liberal
and equitable towards the poorer part of the community. The
report intended to exempt from taxation the wearing apparel and
the household and kitchen furniture of every one in the state, and
certainly there could be no one who would object to paying the
small sum of fifty cents in a year towards defraying the expenses
of the state. He hoped the amendment would not pass, for the
Legislature would be changing it every year. First a poll tax and
then its repeal, and in this way the revenue of the state would
always be uncertain and the people could not make provision to
meet the taxes with any degree of certainty.

Mr. ALLEN thought a poll tax unjust and improper. The
gentleman last up did not desire to give the Legislature power to
fix the tax; but he is willing to give them the power to dispose of
the funds raised by it. Where is the difference? Why not leave
the question then with the representatives of the people whom
they can instruct upon this subject. He lived in a county where
this subject was discussed, and the people of that section are
opposed to it. He agreed with the remark that there were too
many "shalls" in the constitution. Yesterday, gentlemen when
they had a small majority refused to give to the Legislature power,
in case the ballot system did not suit the people to change it to the
old mode of voting, to which we have been so long accustomed.
We all come here to present our views and represent our constitu-
ents, and at the same time we must of necessity compromise those
views in order to obtain the support of the minority. There
would be scarcely any proposition that would be passed here,
that would not be opposed by a respectable minority, and we

620 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

should pass nothing that would excite in the breasts of members,
an opposition to our constitution. He was opposed to a poll tax
on principle, and if it should be fixed as a permanent thing in the
constitution he would have to oppose the constitution. He
mentioned this not as a threat, but as a plain undeniable fact,
which it would be well to consider on this subject and upon
others.

Mr. WEST said, this subject formed no part of the canvass
in his county, but since he had been here, he had received an
expression of the sentiment of his constituents, and that was in
favor of the poll tax as an experiment. But only to be levied so
long as the people desired it. He was opposed to the insertion
in the constitution of any imperative provision. He would vote
against any clause that would endanger the adoption of the con-
stitution. He believed the people of the state of Illino[is] to be
in favor of the poll tax, yet he was candidly of opinion that in ten
years they would be opposed to it. He would vote to strike out
"shall," and insert "may." 'He was also opposed to the section
providing for the appropriation of the money. He wished that
to be left to the Legislature.

Mr. McCALLEN was opposed to the section, and in favor of
the amendment. He would also vote for striking out all after
the word "each!" He was in favor of a poll tax. He thought
that those who showed such a feverish anxiety for the interests of
the poor men, did not fairly represent the feelings of that portion
of the community. He was one of that class, and knew that they
were willing to contribute in that way to the expenses of the State.
— It was argued that persons would not come to this state if we
levied this tax. He would answer that, if any one was unwilling
to pay fifty cents in a year to defray the expenses of the govern-
ment, it should be our policy to say to all such: "remain where
you are; do not come to Illinois." A poll tax was levied in almost
every state in the Union, and no one had ever repealed it. He was
raised in an adjoining state, and had seen its practical operation,
and no man ever refused to pay it. Any man who permitted his
name to be posted, for delinquency in paying his capitation tax,
might as well declare himself a member of the second "Indiana
Regiment." Mr. McC. said that he could not understand those

FRIDAY, JULY 30, 1847 621

who opposed the poll-tax, it was his opinion that they had some
other motives, which had not been disclosed.

Mr, ALLEN said, he hoped the member would explain what
he means.

Mr. McC ALLEN said, he did not wish to oflFend that gentleman,
for he esteemed him highly; he had only said it was his opinion,
and when he had an opinion, he generally belched it out.

Mr. ALLEN said, that if he meant that he (Mr. A.) had any
other motive than that expressed by him, he was perfectly willing
that it should be stated.

The CHAIRMAN said, that he was determined there should
be no personalities. The member from Hardin was in order, so far,
and could proceed.

Mr. McCALLEN, after a short pause, said, that his friend
had cut the thread of his discourse, and he felt he had no wax to
mend it, and therefore, he would sit down.

Mr. ARCHER had heretofore expressed his views in opposi-
tion to the poll tax, but had voted for the instruction as a com-
promise. At that time, he did not know the sentiment of his
people; but, when at home, he made some enquiries, and found
the sentiment of his people was sensitive on the subject. Many
were in favor of a poll tax, and many were bitterly opposed to it,
or to any compromise, for this reason, he would go for the com-
promise: the giving to the Legislature power to levy the tax or not.
And, to carry out that compromise, he had made the motion to
amend, now before the committee.

Mr. THOMAS advocated the adoption of the provisions that
the money should be appropriated to the payment of our school
debt. As, unless we did so, and left the matter before the Legis-
lature, we should have the same ill-advised legislation that we
have hitherto had.

Mr. WEAD had expressed his views upon this subject before.
He would detain the committee, with but a few remarks. He
said this tax is equal to one and a half mills or fifteen cents on the
hundred dollars of property in the state; the same amount as we
have now provided for the payment of the state debt, making a
tax of three mills or thirty cents on the one hundred dollars,
independent of the tax of two mills for ordinary purposes. Will

622 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the people submit to this? The Auditor had informed him that
at the end of this year the amount of taxable property in this state
would amount to $100,000,000. — The tax of one and a half mills
upon this would be $150,000. He was in favor of a tax of three
mills, to be set apart for the payment of the interest of the state
debt, but this poll tax, which may be one dollar, fixed permanently
in the constitution will interfere with a favorite measure of the
people, far more desirable than a poll tax. That object was the
adoption of the constitution. It was well known that in many
sections of the state, the people were opposed to it, and if it should
be fixed as the permanent policy they would vote against the
constitution. But, if the power be given to the Legislature, the
people, when they may desire it, will themselves force that body
to pass such a law. There could be no question more appropriately
left to the Legislature than this question of a poll tax. He doubted
much the expediency of levying a poll tax in the state of Illinois,
but if the people required it he would give the legislature power to
levy it. Gentlemen admitted the difficulty of collecting this tax
from those who had no property, but they put the matter on the
ground that the pride and patriotism of the people would prompt
the payment. He had as high an opinion of the pride and patriot-
ism of the people as any one, and that they would rush forward and
make any sacrifice to pay the debt or to sustain the honor and
character of the state, and he believed that if a poll tax was levied
to-day to pay the state debt, the people would willingly embrace
the opportunity, but if, after paying it from year to year and seeing
no diminution of the debt, they would become lukewarm and tired
with its burden. He lived in a state where a poll tax had existed
from the foundation of their government, but the land there
belonged almost entirely to residents. Here it was different.
Our debt was acquired in improving the land of the non-resident
as well as of the resident. It was, therefore, unjust to tax those
landholders who reside here with a double tax to clear the land
of non-residents from an incumbrance which is upon it. This was
unequal, and therefore, he opposed it. The resident now paid a
poll tax — in the shape of road tax, which was as much for the
benefit of the non-resident as for himself, and he asked would
they now adopt a poll tax, which would only place an additional

FIRBAY, JULY JO, i847 623

burden on the resident and relieve the non-residents of an incum-
brance upon their land? The people had not demanded this poll
tax at our hands, and he asked would this Convention fix perma-
nently in the constitution such a provision.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison said, that he knew the member
from Fulton was as anxious as any one to clear the state of
the heavy debt upon her, and to provide for the payment of the
interest on that debt, but he was wrong in his present views, and
his remarks should be replied to or they might produce a wrong
effect. He had presented the whole amount of taxes that we
have proposed to levy and those now levied to amount nearly to
seventy-five cents on the hundred dollars. This as an argument
against a poll tax is of no weight, for if we make a provision for
this poll tax, the Legislature will have power to reduce the other
taxes now levied, and the^only object of this tax is that the system
may become one more equal.

The member from Greene says, that out of fifteen hundred votes
in his county, there was but one hundred found in opposition to a
poll tax. The member from Marshall says a large majority of
the people in his county are in favor of this tax; his colleague
[Mr. West] has said that the opinion of our county is in favor of it,
and there was no doubt the same opinion was held all over the
state, and there could be no danger of its defeating the consti-
tution.

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau could see no objection to the section.
A poll tax was in his opinion just and equitable.

Mr. CALDWELL moved to amend the proposed amendment
by further striking out all after the word "each;" which was
accepted by Mr. Archer as a modification of his amendment.

Mr. HOGUE was in favor of the amendment, and in favor
of the poll tax. He had been in favor of a poll tax always, and
had expressed that opinion to the people of his county before the
election. He would prefer the section as it was reported by the
committee, but when the matter was before the Convention
before, there were several resolutions under discussion, and that
which was adopted, was offered as a compromise, and was adopted
as such, by a vote of 1 10 to 49. He desired to adhere to the com-
promise.

624 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. FARWELL said, this was not a question that had been
discussed before his constituents. He and his colleagues were
then left to exercise their own judgment upon the subject. He
would vote for the amendment, and then vote against the whole
section. He was opposed to the poll tax as unjust, unequal, and
as resulting injuriously upon the finances of the state. Property-
was the basis of taxation, none other could be found certain. A
man that had property, could be forced to pay his taxes, but how
could you collect the tax from a man who had nothing? To
attempt to force one dollar from a man who had nothing, was
idle, for you would obtain nothing for your trouble. But to
sweeten the section, and to make it more palatable to the
poor man, they exempted personal chattels to the value of one
hundred dollars, from taxation. Now the poor man would have
to pay a tax of about twenty-five cents on that hundred dollars;
but, for his benefit, you exempt him from this taxation, in consider-
ation of his paying fifty cents or one dollar in shape of a poll tax.
It was unjust and unequal, because it increased the burdens upon
the residents, for the purpose of improving the property of the
state, and of the non-resident, while the latter, by whom the greater
part of the land in our state was owned, paid none of it. Gentle-
men said that the requiring of this tax was beneficial, because those
who paid it, would feel a greater interest in the state. He did not
believe that the people who were most oppressed by the govern-
ment loved that government best. Such was an attribute of
spaniels, but not of men.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery repeated his views in favor of the
justice of a poll tax. He considered that every man in the state,
who was protected by the state, in his person, character and prop-
erty, was bound, in justice and honor, to contribute to the sup-
port of the state. Every principle of justice dictated this. The
landholder had a greater interest than one who had no land, and
he paid a greater tax; he too, had a greater interest than that of
his land, his life and his person were protected, and for this he was
bound to contribute.

Mr. MASON addressed the committee in favor of a poll tax.
And then the committee rose and reported progress. And on
motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

FRIDAY, JULY 30, 1847 625

AFTERNOON

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole,
and resumed the subject under consideration in the morning.
The question pending was on striking out "shall," in the first line,
and inserting "may," and striking out all after the word "each,"
being taken was decided in the affirmative — yeas 78.

Mr. WOODSON moved to strike out the section, as amended,
and insert the following sections:

"Sec. I. The Legislature shall cause to be collected from all
free white inhabitants of this state, over the age of twenty-one
years, and under the age of fifty years, a capitation tax of not less
than fifty cents, nor more than one dollar each, until the payment
of the state debt, to be paid into the state treasury, and applied
as the Legislature may direct: Provided, when the poll tax herein
provided for shall be fixed at one dollar, no person paying said tax
shall be required to perform more than one day's labor on the
public road during the year; but when said tax shall be fixed at
less than one dollar, two days' labor may be required.

"Sec. 2. The foregoing section shall be submitted separately
to the people, at the same time that the constitution shall be
submitted to them for their ratification or rejection; and if a
majority of the votes polled at such election shall be in favor of
such tax, then the same shall be a part of the constitution of the
state, but if a majority of the votes shall be cast against the said
section, the same shall not be a part of the constitution; but the
Legislature may, notwithstanding, when they shall deem it advisa-
ble, levy such tax as provided in said first section."

Mr. SCATES moved to insert in said amendment the follow-
ing: "Provided, that whenever a capitation tax is assessed, as
provided in this section, there shall also be assessed and collected

an additional capitation tax, of amount on every 1 100, on the

following property, viz : On the excess, in value, above $ 1 000, of all
dwelling, commercial, manufacturing houses and appurtenances;
on the excess, in value, above $100, of all household and kitchen
furniture, and on all jewels, trinkets, ornaments, time-pieces and
pleasure carriages."

Messrs. Woodson and Scates explained their respective
amendments.

626 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

And the question being taken on that of Mr. S., it was rejected.

Mr. GEDDES moved to provide that no person should vote
unless said tax was paid; and the same was rejected.

Mr. CHURCHILL moved to amend the last section of amend-
ment by providing that the Legislature shall always submit the
law, providing for a poll tax, to the people for their approval;
and it was rejected.

Mr. DAWSON moved to strike out "50 years" in amendment;
and it was carried.

Mr. THOMPSON moved to fill the blank with "70 years."
Agreed to.

Mr. FARWELL said, in order to test his friends, who were so
tenacious for the rights of the blacks, he moved to strike out
"white." Rejected.

Mr. STADDEN moved to strike out "inhabitant," and insert
"voter." Carried — yeas 50, nays 59. [sic]

And the question being taken on striking out the section and
inserting the amended sections, offered by Mr. Woodson, it was
decided in the negative.

Mr. THOMAS offered a substitute for the section which was
before the committee for one hour and a half, and to amend
which innumerable propositions were made and rejected, and then
Mr. T. withdrew it.

Mr. HAY moved to amend the section by inserting the words
"able bodied" before the words "free white." Carried.

Mr. ROMAN moved to amend by inserting "who are entitled
to the right of suffrage." Carried — yeas 69.

Messrs. Vance, Kenner and Hurlbut offered amendments;
which were rejected, and the section was adopted as follows:

"Sec. I. The Legislature may cause to be collected from all
able bodied, free, white male inhabitants of this state, over the
age of twenty-one years, and under the age of sixty years, who
are entitled to the right of suffrage, a capitation tax of not less
than fifty cents, nor more than one dollar, when the Legislature
may deem it necessary."

"Sec. 2. The Legislature shall provide for levying a tax by
valuation, so that every person shall pay a tax in proportion to
the value of his or her property; such value to be ascertained by

FRIDAY, JULY 30, 1847 627

some person to be elected or appointed in each county in the state,
in such manner as the Legislature shall direct, and not otherwise:
but the Legislature shall have power to tax peddlers, auctioneers,
brokers, hawkers, commission merchants, showmen, jugglers,
inn-keepers, grocery -keepers, and ferries, and persons using and
exercising franchises and privileges, in such manner as they shall
from time to time direct."

This section was taken up. Several trivial amendments were
offered by Messrs. Campbell of McDonough, Wead, Brockman,
West and Markley and rejected.

Mr. SCATES moved to amend by inserting after the word
"person," in the first line, the words "corporation and govern-
ment."

This amendment brings up Mr. Scates' proposition to tax
the United States lands,

Pending which, the committee rose, and the Convention
adjourned till to-morrow at 8 a. m.

XLIII. SATURDAY, JULY 31, 1847

Leave of absence for eight days was granted to Mr. Jackson.

Mr. GRAIN, from the committee on Miscellaneous Subjects,
reported an article, to be inserted in the constitution, in relation to
county courts. — Read, laid on the table, and 250 copies ordered
to be printed.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to suspend the rules for the purpose
of taking up a resolution offered by him some days since, providing
for the adjournment of this Convention on the 30th inst.

And the question being taken by yeas and nays, was decided
in the affirmative — yeas 77, nays 30.

The resolution was then taken up.

Mr. WITT moved to strike out "30th inst." — Carried.

Mr. WITT moved to insert "20th August."

Mr. ADAMS moved to insert "September the first."

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to insert "August 25."

Mr. DAWSON moved to add to the resolution the following:

"Provided, no member hereafter shall, on any question, either
in committee of the whole or in Convention, be allowed to speak
more than once on any one question, nor for a longer period than fif-
teen minutes; and the president of the Convention or chairman of
the committee of the whole is hereby required to rigidly enforce
the same."

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison moved to lay the resolution on
the table; on which motion the yeas and nays were ordered and
taken, and the motion was rejected — yeas 26, nays 94.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon rose to a point of order, and
stated it to be, that the rules required that no resolution could be
offered or discussed in the Convention; that they also required, to
suspend them or any of them, an affirmative vote of " two-thirds
of the members;" this two-thirds of the members, in his view,was
two- thirds of the members elected. Therefore, two- thirds of the
members elect not having voted to suspend the rules, the resolu-
tion could not be considered by the Convention.
628

SATURDAY, JULY 31, 1847 629

The PRESIDENT decided that the words "two-thirds of the
members" meant two- thirds of those present, and that, therefore,
the resolution was properly before the Convention.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL appealed from the decision of the chair.

And the question being put — shall the decision of the president
stand as the decision of the Convention? It was decided by yeas
and nays in the affirmative — yeas 94, nays 26.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the previous question; which was
seconded.

And the vote being taken on inserting "September the first,"
it was rejected— yeas 48, nays not counted.

The question on inserting "August 25" was decided in the
affirmative — yeas 62, nays ^2>-

Mr. DAWSON'S amendment was then adopted, and the
resolution, as amended, was passed.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the
whole — Mr. Edwards of Sangamon in the chair, and resumed the
consideration of the report of the committee on Revenue.

The question pending was on the amendment proposed by
Mr. ScATES to the second section of the report, to-wit: to give the
legislature power to tax "corporations and governments" — the
objects being to tax the United States lands.

Mr. SCATES addressed the committee for fifteen minutes,
during which time he had but laid the foundation of his argument,
when he was called to order by the chairman, under the rule
adopted in the morning, restricting debate to that "period."

Messrs. Casey, McCallen, Sherman, Davis of Montgomery,
Adams, Peters, and Dawson insisted on the enforcement of the
rule. Messrs. Davis of McLean, Brockman, and Jenkins advo-
cated a suspension of the rule in this case, because Mr. S. held the
floor yesterday, and yielded it for an adjournment, under an
implied belief that he would be allowed to proceed to-day.

Mr. SCATES said, he desired no one to vote from courtesy to
him, if the importance of the subject did not demand investigation,
he wanted the rule to be enforced.

And the question being taken on a suspension of the rules, it
was decided in the negative.

The committee divided on the amendment of Mr. S., first on

630 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

inserting "corporation," and it carried; and then on inserting
"government," and it was rejected.

Mr. LOGAN moved to amend by striking out the words "in
each county in the state." He thought this giving to the several
counties the right of choosing their assessors would be found, as
heretofore, to be inefficient in its results. He was of opinion
that the power should be given to the Legislature to appoint the
assessors, or else we might have similar cases to what had occurred
in the state some years ago. One county has refused to assess her
property, and has paid no taxes for four years. They elect as
assessors men pledged to resign before the time for discharging
their duty, and the state loses so much of her revenue.

Mr. Z. CASEY thought no such case would ever occur again;
he would suggest to the member from Sangamon the propriety of
inserting a provision that in case any county acted in the way
spoken of, that the Legislature might then appoint assessors.

Mr. CALDWELL opposed the motion to strike out. The
section, as it now stood, presented a principle which should be
observed throughout our whole organic law — that all power is in
the people, that all the officers to carry out that power should be
chosen by them, and made responsible directly to them. Once
assume the principle that the people would be so lost to honesty
and virtue as to refuse to assess their own property or to choose
officers to perform that duty, then away with all elections of officers
by the people, for the principle will apply to the choice of all offi-
cers as well as that of assessors. We must always assume that the
people are honest, virtuous and patriotic, and upon that all our
proceedings must be based. Otherwise, how can we give them the
choice of any officer? — All power is derived from the people; and
all officers exercising that power, particularly assessors, who can
use it more oppressively upon the people than almost any other,
should be directly responsible to the people, for the manner in
which they perform their duties.

Mr. ROUNTREE made a few remarks to the same effect.

Mr. Thomas and Mr. Wead advocated the striking out.

The committee divided on the motion, and it was carried —
yeas 59, nays 50.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to insert, after "valuation," the fol-

SATURDAY, JULY 31, 1847 631

lowing: "but (the Legislature) may fix a minimum valuation
upon real estate."

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey offered as a substitute for the amend-
ment the following: "But no lands subject to taxation shall be
assessed at less than one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre."

Mr. THOMAS advocated the fixing of a minimum valuation
upon land, below which no assessment should be made. He
cited the amount of revenue received in 1841, when such a policy
was in force — the minimum at $3 per acre.

Mr. CALDWELL was surprised to hear the principle that all
taxation should be based on the value of property, controverted
by any one, or that it was just to fix any arbitrary rate of taxation
on property, independent of its value, advocated. He held that
the true and only just basis of taxation was the value of the thing
taxed. He was asked what was the value of property — how it
could be ascertained? The value of all property is the profit it
yields — what it is intrinsically worth, what it will command.
This was evident. All the relations and business of sotiety
establish the principle that the true valuation of property is by the
amount of capital invested and the profits it yields. Erect any
system of valuation upon any other basis, and society will break
it down and trample upon any such arbitrary rule as taxing
property independent of its real value. Such arbitrary rules are
calculated to violate the laws of nature, the very instincts of man,
for the principle of valuation of property by the profit it yields,
pervades all the relations of society. He replied to the calcula-
tions submitted by Mr. Thomas, based upon the increase of reve-
nue in '41, by reminding the Convention that in that year there was
a greater amount of real estate subject to taxation than at any pre-
ceding time, and that the rate of taxation was higher than at the
diflrerent periods mentioned. He attributed the difference in the
amount of revenue at the different periods not to any minimum
provision, but to the changes by Legislature in the rate of taxa-
tion.

Mr. LOGAN was in favor of a minimum valuation, not to be
fixed in the constitution, but to be left with the Legislature.

Mr. WILLIAMS was opposed to a minimum valuation, as
unjust. He was willing to compromise on the proposition of Mr.

632 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Knapp, but if that were rejected he would vote against it entirely.
He thought valuation was the only true basis of taxation. Its
value was what it is worth, what it will bring in the market.
The question was taken on the substitute of Mr. Knapp, and it was
rejected. The question recurred on the amendment of Mr. Mark-
ley, and the committee decided, yeas 49, nays 56; no quorum
voting.

The committee rose and reported the fact to the Convention,
and the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention met, but few members being present, a call
was ordered. After some time spent in the call, and no quorum
appearing, the sergeant-at-arms was despatched for the absentees.
After a sufficient number appeared, the Convention resolved
itself into committee of the whole.

The question pending was on the amendment of Mr. Markley.

Mr. CHURCHILL offered a substitute; which was rejected.

The question was then taken on the amendment, and resulted
yeas 48, nays 53. No quorum voting. A second vote was taken
and the same result was had.

The committee rose and reported the fact to the Convention.

A call was ordered and, after considerable time, 117 members
appeared, and the committee resumed its sitting.

And the question being again put on the amendment, it was
rejected — yeas 52, nays 59.

Mr. DAWSON moved to strike out the words "and not
otherwise."

Mr. SCATES said, this was the minimum proposition in
another shape, and he hoped it would again be voted down. And
the motion was rejected.

Mr. SCATES moved to reconsider the vote by which his
amendment, to insert "government," was rejected. And the
vote was reconsidered.

Mr. SCATES then withdrew his amendment.

Mr. SCATES offered an additional section in relation to taxing
liquors; which was rejected.

SATURDAY, JULY 31, i847 633

Sec. 3. The following property shall be forever exempt from
taxation:

1st. The wearing apparel of every person in the state.

2d. The household and kitchen furniture of every housekeeper
in this state, not to exceed in value the sum of one hundred dollars.

3d. The real and personal property of this state.

4th. All lands belonging to the school fund of any township
in the state, and every school-house, court-house, and jail, and all
county lands and buildings set apart for county purposes, not to
exceed five acres.

5 th. Every building erected for religious worship, the pews
and furniture within the same, and lands whereon such building is
erected, not exceeding ten acres.

6th. Every building erected for the use of any literary, reli-
gious, benevolent, charitable, or scientific institution, and the tract
of land on which the same is situated, not exceeding ten acres;
also, the personal property belonging to any such institution and
connected with and set apart for the use thereof.

Mr. WEST moved to insert after "ten acres:" "and such
lands as may be set apart for burial grounds;" which was
adopted.

Mr. WEST moved to strike out the words, "the following
property shall be forever exempt from taxation," and insert:
"the Legislature may exempt from taxation the following proper-
ty"— yeas 62, nays 41. No quorum voting.

A second vote was taken and resulted yeas 69, nays 50.
Carried.

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out the section, and insert the
7th section of his report.

Mr. KITCHELL offered as a substitute for the amendment:
"the Legislature may exempt such property from taxation as
they may deem necessary" — yeas 69, nays 31. No quorum
voting. A second vote was had and resulted — yeas 74, nays 35.

And the vote being taken on inserting the substitute in lieu
of the section, it was decided in the negative.

Mr. LOCKWOOD offered, as an additional section, the fol-
lowing; which with a slight amendment, was adopted — yeas 61,
nays 39.

634 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sec. 4. Hereafter, no purchaser of any land or town lot, at
any sale of lands or town lots for taxes due either to this state,
or any county, or incorporated town or city, within the same; or at
any sale for taxes or levies authorized by the laws of this state,
shall be entitled to a deed for the land or town lot so purchased,
until he or she shall have complied with the following conditions,
to-wit: Such purchaser shall serve, or cause to be served, a written
notice of such purchase on every person in possession of such
land or town lot, three months before the expiration of the time
of redemption on such sale; in which notice he shall state when
he purchased the land or town lot, the description of the land or
lot he has purchased, and when the time of redemption will expire.
In like manner he shall serve on the person or persons in whose
name or names such land or lot is taxed, a similar written notice,
if such person or persons shall reside in the county where such
land or lot shall be situated; and in the event that the person or
persons in whose name or names the land or lot is taxed, do not
reside in the county, such purchaser shall publish such notice in
some newspaper printed in such county; and if no newspaper is
printed in the county, then in the nearest newspaper that is pub-
lished in this state to the county in which such land or lot is sit-
uated; which notice shall be inserted three times, the last time not
less than three months before the time of redemption shall expire.
Every such purchaser, by himself or agent, shall, before he shall
be entitled to a deed, make an affidavit of his having complied
with the conditions of this section; which affidavit shall be deliver-
ed to the person authorized by law to execute such tax deed; and
which shall, by him, be filed with the clerk of the circuit court of
the county where such land or lot shall lie, to be by such clerk
carefully preserved among the files of his office. Any person
swearing falsely in any such affidavit shall be deemed guilty of
perjury, and punished accordingly. In case any person shall be
compelled, under this section, to publish a notice in a newspaper,
then, before any person, who may have a right to redeem such land
or lot from such tax sale, shall be permitted to redeem, he or she
shall pay the officer or person who by law is authorized to receive
such redemption money, the printer's fee for publishing such notice.

SATURDAY, JULY 31, i847 635

and the expenses of swearing or affirming to the affidavit, and filing
the same.

Mr. FARWELL offered as an additional section: "The state
revenue shall be collected in gold and silver coin, or auditor's war-
rants; and the county revenue shall be collected in gold or silver
coin, or county orders."

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out "auditor's warrants."

And the question being taken on striking out, resulted — yeas
30, nays 59. No quorum voting.

The committee rose and reported that fact to the Convention.

And the Convention adjourned till Monday, at 8 a. m.

XLIV. MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 1847

Messrs. Jenkins and Thompson presented petitions from their
respective counties, praying for an exemption of a homestead
from execution. Referred to the committee on Miscellaneous
Subjects.

Mr. GRAIN, from the committee on Miscellaneous Subjects,
to whom had been referred certain petitions praying a reduction
of the General Assembly, reported the same back, and were dis-
charged from the further consideration thereof.

A few members only being present, the Convention was called,
and after some time occupied in the call, a quorum appeared.

Mr. THOMAS moved to suspend the rules to enable him to
offer a resolution of inquiry to the committee on Finance, and the
house divided thereon, and no quorum voted.

Mr. THOMAS then withdrew his resolution.

Leave of absence was granted for two weeks to Messrs. Norton,
and Hunsaker; for one week to Mr. Green of Tazewell, and for
three days to Mr. Knowlton.

Mr. ECCLES moved to suspend the rules to enable him to
offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That whenever a call of the Convention is ordered,
the secretary shall note on the journal the names of the absentees.

And the rules were suspended.

Mr. WOODSON moved to amend, by adding "except those
absent by sickness or by leave."

The Convention divided on the amendment, and stood 66 in
the affirmative, 39 in the negative. No quorum voting.

Mr. WOODSON withdrew his amendment.

The yeas and nays were ordered on the resolution, and it was
adopted — yeas 109, nays 7.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to suspend the rules, to enable him
to offer a resolution that the "fifteen minute period" be rescinded;
and the Convention refused to suspend the rules.
636

MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 1847 637

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole,
and resumed the consideration of the subject of Revenue.

The question pending was on the proposed additional section,
offered by Mr. Farwell on Saturday, and the motion to strike
out thereof the words "auditor's warrants."

Mr. THOMAS made a few remarks in favor of his amendment.

Messrs. Hogue, Tuttle and Dement opposed the amendment.
They considered it unjust in the state to refuse to receive for taxes
the issues of the state.

And the question being taken on Mr. Thomas' motion, it was
rejected — yeas 29.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to insert after "auditor's warrants"
the words: "or other state indebtedness;" which was rejected.

The question recurred on the proposed section, and that, too,
was rejected.

Mr. SHERMAN offered, to be added to the 3d section, the
following: "Provided that if any part of the aforesaid ten acres
is used for any other purposes than a burial ground, or a building
for religious worship, then the same shall be taxed as other proper-
ty."

Mr. WOODSON offered the following, as a substitute for the
amendment, and it was accepted as a modifiction.

"Provided that property owned and used for purposes of
education, or religious worship, or to the burial of the dead, shall
be exempt from taxation, but the General Assembly shall have
power to limit the quantity of land to be exempt as aforesaid."

And the question was taken on the amendment, as modified,
and adopted.

Mr. HOGUE moved as a substitute for the third section, as
amended, the following:

"The property of the state and of the counties, both real and
personal, and such other property as the Legislature may deem
necessary for school purposes, shall be exempt from taxation."

And the substitute for the section was adopted.

Mr. LOGAN moved to add to the section: "and necessary
wearing apparel, not including watches, trinkets and jewelry."

Mr. ECCLES moved to add to the amendment: "also, the

638 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

household and kitchen furniture, not exce[e]ding in value one hun-
dred dollars;" which amendment was accepted.

Mr. LOGAN then withdrew the modified amendment.

Mr. THOMAS moved to add the following additional sections:

"Sec. 5. The corporate authorities of counties, townships,
school districts, cities, towns and villages may be vested with
power to assess and collect taxes for corporate purposes; such
taxes to be uniform in respect to persons and property, within the
jurisdiction of the body imposing the same.

"Sec. 6. The specification of the objects and subjects of taxa-
tion shall not deprive the General Assembly of the power to require
other objects or subjects to be taxed in such manner as may be
consistent with the principles of taxation fixed in this constitu-
tion."

Mr. CHURCHILL offered, as an additional section, the follow-
ing:

"The Legislature may, at any regular session, change, alter or
repeal the foregoing sections by a vote of two-thirds of the members
thereof;" which was disagreed to.

Mr. DAWSON offered a long additional section; which was
rejected.

Mr. TUTTLE offered the following proviso to be added to
section 4:

"Provided, that every tract or parcel of landl ying in this state,
subject to taxation, shall be liable for all taxes accruing on the
same, and all such lands may be proceeded against and sold for
taxes without regard to ownership, or otherwise, in such manner
as the Legislature shall prescribe by law; and provided, in all cases,
a judgment shall be obtained against such lands before the same
shall be sold."

Mr. TUTTLE expressed himself in opposition to section 4 as
it stood.

Mr. CHURCHILL opposed both the section and the amend-
ment.

Mr. LOCKWOOD defended section 4 as necessary and just
to the protection of the people, and opposed the amendment.

And the question being taken on the amendment, it was
rejected.

MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 1847 639

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the committee rise and report. Car-
ried.

And the committee rose and reported back to the Convention
the report of the committee, and asked the concurrence of the Con-
vention in the amendments.

Mr. THOMAS moved that the article be laid on the table,
and that 250 copies be printed with the amendments; which
motion was adopted.

Mr. CALDWELL moved the Convention adjourn till 3 p. m.
Lost.

Mr. ADAMS moved to take up the report of the committee
on the Executive Department, as amended in committee of the
whole — yeas 47, nays 58, no quorum voting. A second vote was
taken and resulted — yeas 49, nays 53, no quorum voting. The
yeas and nays were demanded and ordered.

Mr. LOCK WOOD moved a suspension of the rules, to enable
him to offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That hereafter a majority of the members shall con-
stitute a quorum to transact business.

And the Convention refused to suspend the rules.

Mr. ADAMS withdrew his motion.

Mr. DALE moved to take up the report of the committee on
Counties and their Organization.

Mr. WEAD moved a call of the Convention. Objected to.

Mr. LOGAN moved the Convention adjourn till to-morrow
at 8 A. M. And the Convention adjourned till to-morrow.

XLV. TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1847

Mr. GRAIN, from the committee on Miscellaneous Subjects
and Questions, to which was referred sundry petitions on various
subjects, reported the same back to the Convention and was dis-
charged from the further consideration thereof.

Mr. THOMAS moved the Convention resolve itself into com-
mittee of the whole and take up the reports from the committee
on Incorporations, and the motion was concurred in.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the
whole — Mr. Wead in the chair.

The report was read as follows:

Section i. Corporations, not possessing banking powers or
privileges, may be formed under general laws, but shall not be
created by special acts, except for municipal purposes, and in cases
where, in the judgment of the Legislature, the objects of the cor-
poration cannot be attained under general laws.

Sec. 2. Dues from corporations not possessing banking
powers or privileges shall be secured by such individual liabilities
of the corporators, or other means, as may be prescribed by law.

Sec. 3. No State bank shall hereafter be created, nor shall
the state own, or be liable for, any stock in any corporation or
joint stock association for banking purposes.

Sec. 4. No banking powers or privileges shall be granted
either by general or special acts of incorporation, unless directed
by the people of the state as hereinafter provided.

Sec. 5. The Legislature may at any session, but not oftener
than once in four years, direct the vote of the people to be taken
on the day of the general election, for or against the absolute
prohibition contained in the fourth section of this article; six
months notice having first been given, and if a majority voting
shall decide against the prohibition in the said fourth section, the
Legislature may authorize the forming of corporations or associa-
tions for banking purposes by general acts of incorporation, upon
the following conditions:

640

TUESBAY, AUGUST 3, i847 641

1st. No law shall be passed sanctioning in any manner,
directly or indirectly, the suspension of specie payments. 2d.
Ample security shall be required for the redemption in specie of
all bills and notes put in circulation as money, and a registry of all
such bills and notes shall be required. 3d. The stockholders in
every corporation and joint stock association for banking purposes,
issuing bank notes, or any kind of paper credit to circulate as
money, shall be individually responsible to the amount of their
respective share or shares of stock in any such corporation or
association, for all its debts and liabilities of every kind. 4th.
In case of insolvency of any bank or banking associations, the bill
holders shall be entitled to preference in payment over all other
creditors of such bank or association. 5th. Non-payment of
specie shall be a forfeiture of all banking rights and privileges, and
the Legislature shall not have power to remit the forfeiture, or
relieve from any of its consequences; and provision shall be made
by law for the trial, in a summary way, by the judicial tribunals,
of all contested questions of forfeiture of banking privileges.

Sec. 6. Acts of incorporation for municipal purposes, whether
general or special, may at any time be altered, amended, or re-
pealed, and all general acts granting corporate powers of any kind
other than for municipal purposes, may at any time be altered,
amended or repealed, but such alteration, amendment or repeal
shall, unless the right to make the same be reserved, operate
prospectively.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to strike out the first
section and insert the following:

"No corporate body shall be hereafter created, renewed, or
extended within this state, with banking or discounting privi-
leges."

Mr. D. said he was totally opposed to banks and in favor of a
prohibitory clause. This was his position now and at all times.
He addressed a few words to the party with whom he generally
acted (whig) and told them that they were not, as a party, pledged
to state banks or local banks; that was the policy introduced by
their opponents, when they crushed the national bank. The whig
party is only pledged to a national bank; a bank that will give us
a currency that when a man sell[s] his horse or his products at St.

642 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Louis, he can take its notes and they will be as good as silver in
New York. This is what they were pledged to, and therefore he
feared not to be read out of the party for opposing banks in Illi-
nois. But party would govern no longer, we would all soon be one
universal party — a "Rough and Ready party." The people of
this state wanted no banks — wanted no state banks; Cook county
wanted no banks; the people here have declared their hostility
to banks in the form of instructions to their representatives. How
was it that the democratic party, or a portion of them, distrust the
judgment of the people, so far as to openly violate their instruc-
tions? How can they now reject the opinion and sentiments of
the people on this point, when opposition to banks has been the
cardinal principle of the whole party? Why, sir, by voting for
state and local banks they admit that the people are in favor of
them, and is this so? They come here with instructions in their
pockets, yet they disregard the people's opinions and presume to
judge what is best for them. They answer me that the constitu-
tion will be voted down, if prohibition becomes the order of the
day. Sir, it is all gammon. The people will sustain it. The
democracy will sustain it, and one half the whig party will sustain
it. Everywhere it was known as the principle of the democratic
party. Your newspapers, your county and town meetings, all
held the same principle, and it was proclaimed by the convention
that nominated your governor, who was elected by 23,000 major-
ity.

Mr. DEMENT said, that from the haste which had been
shown to test the question of prohibition, it was evident the democ-
racy had cause to congratulate themselves. We have, from the
hot haste, an evidence that perhaps a few of the "tender footed"
are coming to our aid; and it might be that a number of the whig
party would also come to the side of prohibition. Although this
was a favorite hobby with the democratic party, he would say to
those whigs — "Come, come along gentlemen, you are welcome
to ride with us. We don't care even if you mount in front,
we will be willing to ride behind provided we can carry our
principle. On the question of striking out, he said, that the sec-
tion now before them was one in relation to incorporations without
banking powers, and confined exclusively to that.^Such a section

TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1847 643

was necessary and he hoped that it would be suffered to pass by,
and a more proper opportunity to test the question of prohibition
would occur afterwards. This was his view, and he did not think
a fair test could now be had; but if the whig friends of prohibition
— a goodly host he hoped — desired to test it at once, why, he
trusted his democratic friends would go with them and carry the
motion to strike out. Let us do the work while they are in
the humor, while the wind was favorable and in the right quarter.

Mr. MARKLEY was in favor of striking out, and hoped the
question of prohibition would be tested at once.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair said, that he hoped the friends of
prohibition would vote for striking out.

The question was taken on striking out and resulted — yeas 40,
nays 63; no quorum voting.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, he was opposed to prohibition on
general principles, but the great success of the democratic party
in Illinois had been the result of the continued out-cry and preach-
ing by them against banks, and because the whig party were
generally identified with banks. He would vote, therefore, for
prohibition; would unite himself with John Thompson's cattle
and help to draw the democratic cart out of the mud hole. He
would do this, not because the principle was a true one, but for the
purpose of forever putting an end to this cry against banks and
whigs, on which the democratic party always kept in power.

Mr. HARVEY was in favor of the section as it was, it related
only to incorporations without banking privileges, and would vote
against striking out till they were provided for. When the ques-
tion of prohibition came properly before them he would define
his position on that subject.

Mr. BUTLER expressed views similar to those of Mr. Harvey,
as to striking out. On the question of banks his opinions had not
changed. He thought he understood what was democracy as well
as any one else, and desired not the teachings of others. He was
opposed to a prohibitory clause as part of the constitution; but
would vote for it as a separate article, to be submitted to the
people separately from the constitution.

Mr. THOMAS was opposed to striking out the section. He
would not say whether he would vote for prohibition or not, but

644 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

when that question came before them properly he might do so, or
he might not.

Mr. COLBY was opposed to striking out.

And the question being taken on striking out, it was rejected — ■
yeas 44, nays 71.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to strike out the word "and" after
the word "purposes" in the ist section; and the motion was lost —
yeas 50, nays 61.

Mr. CALDWELL moved to add to the section: "all such acts,
whether general or special, may, at any time, be altered, changed,
or repealed," and the same was rejected.

Mr. SCATES moved to add to the section: "the members of
all corporations or associations, other than municipal, religious,
scientific, and charitable, shall be individually liable for the debts,
liabilities and acts of such corporations or associations, and for the
consequences resulting from such acts."

Mr. McCALLEN opposed any exemptions from individual
liability.

And the question being taken the amendment was adopted^
yeas 58, nays SS-

Section 1 was then taken up and — •

Mr. THOMAS moved that it be stricken out. He thought
that the amendment just adopted carried out its object.

Mr. SCATES moved to strike out the words "individual
liabilities of the corporators, or," in order that the legislature
might have power to require greater security than the first section
as amended conferred upon them.

Mr. DEMENT advocated the amendment as giving the
legislature power to require additional means of security; and as
not placing the question of liability beyond their control.

And the question being taken, the motion was lost.

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to strike out the words "not pos-
sessing banking powers or privileges;" and the motion was
rejected.

Mr. CHURCHILL moved to add to the section: "and such
liability shall be levied on their individual property, in proportion
to their several interests in said corporation," and it was rejected.

TLESDJY, AUGUST 3, 1847 645

The question then recurred on the motion to strike out the
section, and it was decided in the negative.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon offered as an additional section,
the following:

"All the property belonging to the inhabitants of any munici-
pal corporation shall be liable to the payment of debts contracted
under the authority of law;" which was adopted.

Section 3 was taken up and —

Mr. McCALLEN moved to add to it: "unless the people
sanction the establishment of a state bank, by a vote at a general
election, to be svlbmitted to them according to law."

Mr. SCATES inquired whether the section as it now read
would affect the interest of the state in any institution at present
existing.

Mr. HOGUE thought the section was intended to effect pro-
spectively, not retrospectively.

Mr. McCALLEN was in favor of a state bank for two reasons.
One, to give the people a good and reliable currency; the other,
to repel the base slander that the people of Illinois have not suffi-
cient virtue and honesty to be allowed to create a currency for
themselves, a right enjoyed by the people in every state in the
Union except our own. He bitterly attacked the fifteen minute
rule, which prevented discussion upon the question, while the
tables were groaning under the weight of speeches delivered in
opposition to banks on a former occasion.

The question was then taken on the amendment, and it was
rejected.

Mr. KENNER moved to strike out "for banking purposes"
and insert "to be created by general or special laws;" rejected.

Mr. HARVEY moved to add to the section the words "to be
hereafter created."

Mr. KITCHELL inquired if the section, as it now stood, would
not prevent the state from becoming the owner of any stock, even
if she were to take it in payment of debt.

Mr. HARVEY thought it would, and for that reason would
vote for it.

And the question being taken on the amendment, it was
adopted.

646 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to strike out the section and insert:
" no corporate body shall be hereafter created, renewed or extended
within this state, with banking or discounting privileges."

Mr. WILLIAMS said, that he was in the legislature at the
time when the state bank was established and was acquainted
with its history. At the opening of the legislature our democratic
Governor informed us that he was about to propose a state bank
which was to give a good and uniform currency, and enable the
state to carry on her intended system of internal improvement.
That bank was established, loans were made, and the internal
improvements fell through, and our prosperity was crushed. Then,
the democratic party commenced a war upon banks; at all their
meetings and assemblages their theme was opposition to banks.
The whigs differed; they came forward to sustain the banks and to
relieve them, and were held up before the state, by the democrats,
as rag barons, friends of swindling monopolies, and the advocates
of banks. That tirade has been kept up till the present day, and
all who are in favor of conservative measures, have fallen under its
effects. He would now vote for prohibition of all banks. But he
would say to his democratic allies, he acted thus for the good of
the whig party and not because he believed the principle a true
one. He acted also for the good of those democrats who were
sincerely in favor of prohibition. He considered that no good
bank could exist in this state, so long as cause for this clamor was
suffered to remain. He would, therefore, vote for prohibition, in
order that the experiment could be tried, and the result would be
that the question would forever be put at rest. He looked upon
the resolutions of instruction from Cook county, as got up for
mere effect, and they were understood to be open to violation.
The whigs and a portion of the democratic party may succeed in
establishing a state bank, but it can never succeed while the cry
of the democratic party is against them; and it was better for the
whigs to give the democrats what they desire now, not that he
believed it would work well, if it did he would become a convert
to it, but that the people may become sick of it, and then we may
have a good bank and one on which all parties will unite.

Mr. SHERMAN said the county of Cook was becoming a
familiar word in the Convention, and the instructions of the

TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, i847 647

democratic convention was becoming tlie theme of every speech.
Those instructions, as he understood them, were not, as had been
ingeniously insinuated, passed with an understanding that they
might be violated, or were not binding. He understood that
they were passed in reference to the banks such as had heretofore
existed in this state, and not in reference to any system that might be
adopted in this Convention. They were passed in good faith, and
not to go before the country for Buncombe purposes. He was
opposed to prohibition, and in favor of giving Illinois the same
privileges that other states possessed. He was opposed to a
national bank; but was willing to have, in this state, a restricted
banking law.

Mr. HARVEY called for a division of the question so as
to vote first on striking out. He was opposed to striking out.
He believed the people of the state are opposed to a state bank.
He was prepared to sustain a prohibition of a state bank, for he
believed the people were united on that subject. He was surprised
to hear in the Convention, where we had met to discuss great
constitutional questions, gentlemen descend to personalities; that
lectures should be read to the gentlemen from Cook and from
other places, about the course they thought proper to follow.
Much difficulty was experienced in ascertaining who was John
Thompson. That story had been told but the true version was
this: John went to market and got drunk: on his return he fell
asleep in his cart, which was drawn into a mud hole; the cattle
struggled and broke from the cart and cleared off. John woke up
and rubbed his eyes and exclaimed, am I John Thompson or am I
not? If I am I have lost my team; if I am not I have found a cart.
Thus it was with the leaders of the party upon this prohibition.
If the gentleman from Jefferson was John Thompson he has lost
his team; if not, he has found a cart. But he had yet to learn
that hostility to banks — total prohibition of them, was a principle
of democracy. No democratic leader ever advocated such doc-
trine. He was opposed to banks, but desired to give the people
the right to say whether they will have them or not.

Mr. GEDDES was in favor of some well regulated system of
banking, which by increasing the capital of the state, would enable
the vast resources of the state to be developed.

648 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. THOMPSON, like Hannibal of old, who had been sworn
in his infancy to eternal enmity to Rome, had sworn eternal
hostility to banks. He had been taught the value of labor, by his
earliest occupation — teaching school in the eastern states. He
received his pay there in eastern bank money and when he started
for Illinois, he found that the price of his toils was almost worthless.
When he reached Albany, he found that his money would not pur-
chase a dinner. There he made his first acquaintance with
brokers and shavers. After that he travelled on New York cur-
rency. Thus in his early days he acquired an enmity to banks,
and it had continued ever since and would not be eradicated from
his mind. He remembered the time when all his democratic
friends spoke of banks in very hard terms, called them monsters,
and all sorts of opprobious names; but now they changed their
tone. He would say to them as did the minister to his people —
when speaking of the devil — my friends, the time was when you
spoke of him bitterly, when you called him "the devil," but now
forsooth, you rub him down the back and call him "poor fallen
angel."

Mr. T. spoke some time in opposition to banks in any shape,
and thought that the resources of the state could all be developed
as well by gold and silver, as by a paper currency.

Mr. ARCHER expressed himself as opposed to all kinds of
banks and banking systems, and would vote against them no
matter what shape they were presented in. He was in favor of a
total prohibition and would vote for that and that only.

The question was taken on striking out, and lost.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to strike out the word
"state" before the word "bank;" lost.

The 4th section was read, and

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to strike out and insert the amend-
ment proposed by Mr. Williams.

Mr. ROBBINS moved to strike out all after the word "unless"
and insert, " the act granting the said powers or privileges be sub-
mitted to the people for their approbation or rejection, at the next
general election after the passage of the said act, and if the said act
shall be approved by a majority of the votes given at the said
election, the same shall thereafter become a law."

TUESDAY, AUGUST j, 1847 649

Mr. FAR WELL moved to add to the amendment: "Provided,
that all persons voting for the adoption of this section shall be
responsible to the full extent of all their property, both personal
and real, for all the failures, miscarriages or defalcations of any
and of all banks hereafter to be created or established by virtue
of this section."

Mr. FARWELL called upon all those who recommended those
institutions to the people as safe, trustworthy, &c., to show their
sincerity, by voting for his proposition. He considered it but fair
that they should be compelled to endorse their recommendation.
All the laws of trade, and of every day life, recognized a
similar principle; and those who recommended these institutions
should be required to endorse that recommendation, by becoming
responsible for any loss that might be sustained.

Mr. ROBBINS thought the people should have the right to
govern themselves in all things. They were in favor of a bank of
some kind, and would take the best they could get. The report
of the committee put the time when they could have a bank too
far off; it might be eight years before they could have one. His
amendment put it in their power to have one at a shorter period.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall sincerely hoped thatMr.FARWELL's
proviso would not carry; it would be the greatest injustice to the
members of the Convention who would vote for a bank. He
advocated the amendment of Mr. Robbins.

The question was taken on Mr. F's. proviso, and after two
votings was rejected — yeas 35, nays 76.

Mr. GRAIN moved to add to the amendment of Mr. Robbins
the following:

And should there ever at any time exist a bank charter of any
kind in this state by authority of law, and if said institution shall
at any time reject or refuse to redeem any and all of her issues,
when presented for redemption, in gold and silver — without delay
at par value, then and in that case said charter or privilege shall
be forfeited forever; and all the property of her stockholders, both
personal and real, shall be bound for the redemption of all their
circulation.

Mr. DEMENT said that he was sorry to see amendments to
bank propositions coming from the friends of prohibition. We

650 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

have now arrived at that point when we might test our strength.
Let us do it. If we fail then it will be time for us to turn our
attention to the propositions and attempt to mend them; and
finally to take the second best to prohibition. It was true, he did
not feel as confident of success now as he did in the morning; he
had been led to expect too much from the other side of the house.
The gentleman from Adams, (Mr. Williams) who had led off on
that side for prohibition, has said that his object in so doing is to
accomplish the ultimate success of the whig party; he has viewed
it as a party question. Now it is well known the whigs for that
reason could not follow him. They had made the "no party"
principle the basis of their action, and have declared themselves
for "no party" policy, and cannot, consistently, vote for a party
movement. However, the gentleman's vote will be with us,
though his heart is against us, and though he gives us, every time
he speaks, two blows back for the one forward, we will not refuse
his aid. He was not so much disappointed as might be conceived
in the result, though he had hoped that the member from Adams
might bring a corporal's guard, or a sergeant's guard, or perhaps
a captain's command, with him; he still remembered that he
could not recruit many in the county where he was. His country-
men were all peace men, were opposed to war, and as this might
be considered an "unholy war" against banks, the whigs could
not enlist. He hoped the friends of prohibition would not try
to sweeten the dose, but first try prohibition. If they failed,
then let us sweeten and spice up every system they offer, and
perhaps it may not be so palatable to its friends after coming
from our hands.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery expressed himself in favor of
voting for prohibition at once.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, he had some difficulty in adapting
himself to his allies, and had been uncertain how to vote; he
would place himself under the gentleman from Lee, and would do
as he did.

Mr. W. then solicited the whigs to vote for prohibition, on
the ground that it would result to their benefit in the end.

The committee rose and reported progress, and the Convention
adjourned till 3 p. m.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1847 651

AFTERNOON

The Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole
and resumed the bank report.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL addressed the committee in opposition to
banks.

An act of special incorporation may frequently afford the
persons associated under it facilities of accomplishing much
public good. But, sir, if those facilities can only be given at the
expense of rights of paramount importance, they ought to be
denied by all whose political morality rejects the odious maxim
that the end justifies the means. Sir, I am particularly hostile to
special legislation, that is, special incorporations. I am opposed
to the objects to be effected, viz: the right of forming partnerships
to be granted to the few, and wholly denied to the many. I am,
in short, opposed to unequal legislation, whatever form it may
assume, or whatever object it may ostensibly seek to accomplish.
It has been truly said, sir, by one of our illustrious Presidents,
that there are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist
only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection,
as Heaven does its rains; shower its favors alike on the high and the
low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing.
But, sir, when it departs from its legitimate office, it widely
departs from the cardinal principle of government, in this country;
the equal political rights of all, when it confers privileges on one set
of men, no matter for what purpose, which are withheld from the
rest. It is in this light, sir, I look upon all special acts of incor-
poration. They convey privileges not previously enjoyed, and
limit the use of them to those on whom they are bestowed. That
acts of incorporation, sir, have been given for objects of intrinsic
excellence and importance, I freely admit, nor do I intend to deny,
that they have been of incalculable benefit to the community at
large. Let it be understood that I do not war against the good
achieved, but seek only to explain the evil of the means. A
special act of incorporation, sir, is a powerful weapon; but is one
that should have no place in the armory of the democracy. It is
an instrument that may hew down forests, and open fountains of
wealth in barren places, but these advantages are purchased at
too dear a rate, if we give for them our freedom. As a general rule,

652 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

too, corporations act for themselves, not for the community. If
they cultivate the barrens, it is to monopolize its fruits, if they
delve the mine, it is to enrich themselves with its treasures. If
they dig new channels for the streams of industry, it is that they
may gather the golden sands for themselves. Even if the benefits
which I, sir, am willing to admit, have been effected by companies,
acting under special privileges and immunities, could not have
been achieved without the assistance of such powers, better would
it have been, in my opinion, far better, sir, that the community
should have foregone the good, than purchase it by the surrender,
in any instance or particular, of a principle which lies at the founda-
tion of human liberty. No one, sir, can foretell the evil conse-
quences from one such error of legislation. Next day the fatal
precedent will plead. The door once open, ambition, selfishness,
cupidity, rush in, each widening the breach, and rendering access
easier to its successor. But fortunately, sir, we are not driven to
the alternative of either foregoing for the future such magnificent
projects as [have] heretofore been effected by special legislation, or
for the sake of accomplishing them, continuing to grant unequal
privileges. It is a propitious omen of success in the great struggle,
in which the real democracy of this country are engaged, that
monopolies are as hostile to the principles of sound economy, as
they are to the fundamental maxims of our political creed. The
good, sir, which they effect, might more simply and more certainly
be achieved without their aid. They are fetters which restrain
the action of the body politic, not motorics which increase its speed.
They are jesses that hold it to earth, not wings that help it to soar.
Our country has prospered, not because of them, but in spite of
them. This young and vigorous republic has bounded rapidly
forward in despite of the burdens which partial legislation has hung
upon its neck, and the clogs it fastened to its heel. But swifter,
sir, would have been its progress, sounder its health, more pros-
perous its general condition, had our law makers kept constantly
in view that their imperative duty requires them to exercise their
functions for the good of the whole community, not for a handful
of obtrusive and grasping individuals, who, under the pretext of
promoting the public welfare, were only eager to advance their
private interests, at the expense of the equal rights of their fellow

TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1847 653

men. Sir, we have been sorrowfully taught the miserable impo-
tence of legislature; it was the fountain from which the waters
of bitterness have flowed; let us not then again unseal it, that it
may infuse another desolating flood. What, sir, can legislation do ?
Insult the community by confirming the special privileges of
money changers, after their own acts have declared their utter
worthlessness? Enable a band of paper money depredators to
prey the more voraciously than before on the vitals of the people?
Authorize them to pour out a fresh torrent of their promises,
now really of no more value than the paper on which they are
written? Will the community tolerate, sir, such an enormous
fraud? We are now rid of banks, let us remain so. Let all
monopolies be swept from the board! Let the whole gang of priv-
ileged money-changers give place to the hardy offspring of
commercial and agricultural freedom, who ask for no protection
but equal laws, and no exemption from the shocks of boundless
competition. Now, sir, is the time for the complete emancipation
of banking from legislative thraldom. If this propitious moment
is suffered to pass by unimproved, the fetter now riven asunder
will be riveted anew and hold us in slavery forever. The choice
is presented to us of freedom or perpetual bondage. Let us, by
the adoption of the prohibitory clause, alone, prevent the restora-
tion of that cumbrous fabric of legislative fraud and folly, which
has destroyed itself, and if raised again, will again topple before
the first commercial revulsion, to bury other myriads in its ruins.
Sir, if I knew any form of speech that would arrest the attention
of this Convention or any mode of argument that would satisfy
their reason, that I have not heretofore used, I would employ it
now, with all the earnestness of a sincere conviction of the impor-
tance of the subject, to persuade them that the only true ground
of hope for the enduring prosperity of our agricultural, mechanical,
and commercial relations consists in the freedom of trade and the
total annihilation of paper money. Sir, the great object that
I desire to see accomplished and to the accomplishment of which I
think the course of things is obviously tending, is the utter and
complete divorcement of politics from the business of banking.
I desire, sir, to see banking divorced not only from federal, but
from state legislation. Nothing but evil, either in this country

654 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

or others, has arisen from their union. The regulation of the
currency and the regulation of credit are both affairs of trade.
Men want no laws on the subject, except for the punishment of
frauds. They want no laws except such as are necessary for the
protection of their equal rights.

The question was taken on Mr. Grain's amendment and lost.

Mr. HARVEY explained the nature of his report to be in fact
a prohibition of banks. It differed from an unqualified prohibi-
tion to this extent only. Under his plan — the people at intervals
of four years — if they desired banks, and so expressed themselves
at the polls, could have them without changing the constitution.
Under the other, they would have to go to the expense of a con-
vention to change the constitution, in order to have banks.

Mr. ROBBINS withdrew his amendment.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to strike out all the section except
the following words — "no banking powers or privileges shall be
granted either by general or special acts of incorporation."

And the question being taken thereon, resulted yeas 52, nays
72.

Mr. SHERMAN moved to strike out all the section after the
words "no banking powers or privileges shall be granted," and
insert the following:

"Except by general laws, which shall be in accordance with the
following provisions:

1st. No law shall be passed, sanctioning, in any manner,
directly or indirectly, the suspension of specie payments.

2d. Ample security in interest paying stocks of the United
States or of the states, shall be deposited with the Treasurer of
State, for the redemption in specie of all the bills and notes put in
circulation, and no stock shall be received in deposit, as aforesaid,
but such as shall be at par value at the time of said deposit, and
of such states as shall have regularly and promptly paid their
interest for the three years immediately preceding the deposit;
and no bills or notes shall be put in circulation by any association
but such as are registered and countersigned by the Treasurer of
State, to any banking association, and the notes or bills so regis-
tered for any banking association; shall not exceed in amount the
stocks or bonds deposited by such association: Provided, That the

TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1847 655

Legislature may also authorize a deposit of the bonds of this state
to be made in like manner, for a like redemption of such bills or
notes; the amount and value of such bonds being determined by
the rate of interest which the state may at the time of such deposit
pay on the same; and the amount of such deposit shall be pro-
portionate to the rate per ceyitum interest paid thereon.

3d. The Stockholders in every corporation and joint stock
association for banking purposes, issuing bank notes or any kind
of paper credits to circulate as money, shall be individually re-
sponsible to the amount of their respective share or shares of
stock in any such corporation or association, for all its debts and
liabilities of every kind.

4th. In case of insolvency of any banking association, the
bill-holders shall be entitled to preference in payment over all
other creditors of such bank or association.

5th. Non-payment of specie shall be a forfeiture of all
banking rights and privileges; and the Legislature shall provide
for the sale of said stocks deposited, and apply the proceeds there-
of, to the redemption of the notes or bills in circulation; and the
Legislature shall not have power to remit the forfeiture, or to
relieve from any of its consequences; and provision shall be made
by law for the trial in a summary way, by judicial tribunals, of all
contested questions of forfeiture of banking privileges.

Sec. 4. No corporation or association for banking purposes
shall have a capital less than fifty thousand dollars, nor greater
than five hundred thousand dollars.

Sec. 5. The embezzlement of the funds or property of any
corporation or joint stock association for banking purposes, by any
officer or agent thereof, shall be deemed a felony, and it shall be
the duty of the General Assembly to provide for the punishment
of such felony in the penitentiary.

Sec. 6. This article shall be separately submitted to a vote
of the people, and if voted for by a majority of all voting on the
question, shall become a part of the constitution."

And the question being first taken on the striking out, it was
decided in the affirmative.

Mr. BUTLER offered a substitute (of which we have no copy)
for the amendment of Mr. Sherman.

656 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. WILLIAMS inquired of the member from Lee if this was
the time to vote for prohibition?

Mr. DEMENT: Yes sir; now is the time to put your shoulder
to the wheel and call on Hercules.

The question was taken on the substitute, and it was rejected.

Mr. ROBBINS offered his amendment (before withdrawn,)
as a substitute; and it was rejected.

The question recurred on Mr. Sherman's amendment.

Mr. teROCKMAN opposed it.

Mr. THOMAS despaired of any good banking system, but
would not vote for prohibition, because that would, in his opinion,
defeat the constitution.

Mr. DEMENT opposed the plan now before them as wild,
ambiguous and dangerous.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery opposed it also, and after a critical
examination of its provisions, pronounced it the most consummate
system for swindling purposes that the ingenuity of the Conven-
tion could devise.

The question was taken on the amendment, and it was rejected
— yeas 46, nays 68.

The section now read as follows: "no banking powers or
privileges shall be granted."

Mr. McCALLEN offered as a substitute for what remained
of the 4th section, the following:

There shall be a poll opened every four years at the general
election in this state, for or against the absolute prohibition of
banks; and if a majority voting shall decide against absolute pro-
hibition, the Legislature may authorize the incorporation of a
bank, with branches — as hereinafter provided.

Mr. DEMENT moved the committee rise and report the sec-
tion. Lost — yeas 50, nays 62.

Mr. CALDWELL moved the committee rise and report pro-
gress. Lost.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out "four years" in the amend-
ment and insert " ten years." Lost.

Mr. MARKLEY offered as a substitute for the amendment
pending, to be added to the present section: "And no branch or

TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, i847 657

agency of any bank in any state in the Union shall be established
in the state of Illinois." Yeas 40, nays 73. Lost.

And the amendment was then rejected.

Mr. HARVEY moved to add to 4th section — "by the legisla-
ture unless directed by the people of the state as herein directed"
— yeas 54, nays 65. Lost.

Mr. LOGAN moved to strike out the 5th and 6th sections of
the report. Carried.

Mr. LOGAN moved the committee rise and report the article.
Carried.

And the committee rose and reported back to the Convention
the report of the committee on Incorporations, and asked a con-
currence in the amendments.

Mr. HOGUE moved to lay the report on the table, and that
250 copies thereof with the amendments be printed.

The question was taken thereon — yeas 56, nays 59, and motion
was rejected.

And then on motion, the Convention adjourned.

XLVI. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847

The question pending at the adjournment yesterday was on
concurring with the amendments of the committee of the whole.

Mr. LOGAN moved, as an amendment to the report, and as
a substitute for the amendments of the committee of the whole,
the adoption of Mr. Sherman's system, with some slight modifi-
cations.

Mr. LOGAN moved the postponement of the whole subject
till Monday next.

Mr. SCATES was opposed to the postponement. The com-
mittee understood the question before them, and why not vote
now? A few days ago, a report came from the committee of the
whole on an important subject — the right of suffrage — and
there was not time given to breathe, before they demanded a
vote.

Mr. SHERMAN was in favor of the postponement. His
plan had been misrepresented by the gentleman from Montgom-
ery, and he desired time to answer him, and to explain his plan.

Mr. DEMENT was opposed to any postponement. The
question was fully discussed yesterday, and now was the time to
vote. The proposition submitted this morning had been examin-
ed, and was fresh in the minds of the members; and he could see no
reason why we should not vote upon it at once. The member
from Cook and his friend from Sangamon, between whom there
appeared to be so much good feeling, also desired to postpone.
This was a joint production of the gentlemen, and what did they
want a postponement for? Because the member from Cook wants
a week to prepare a defence of his plan? Yesterday, he said, it
would speak for itself — to-day, he desires a week to prepare
himself to speak in its favor. The gentleman from Sangamon
desires a postponement, no doubt, to rally his friends; to prepare
and devise some system of banking, on which he and the tender-
footed might unite. He hoped this would not be postponed.
We had passed a resolution to adjourn on the 25th of this month,
658

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 659

and if we postponed this matter and took it up again next
week, as a new question, much time would be lost in its discussion,
and we would never be able to adjourn by that time.

Mr. LOGAN said, that the report of the committee was not
the choice of a majority of the Convention; nor did he think any-
thing that could now be presented would meet with approbation.
Prohibition could not be carried. He desired to postpone to
give time to prepare something on which a majority could unite.

Mr. WEAD said, the reasons given were the best in the world
for his voting for an immediate vote on the question. One reason
is, that he wants to rally his friends. He has offered us the amend-
ment of the gentleman from Cook, and none other. That has
been printed, and read by members, examined and considered, and
if the Convention is not ready to vote now, when will they? We
are now asked to postpone for further consideration, and for time
to rally. Sir, if important arrangements were to have been made,
they ought to have been made long ago. These gentlemen ought
not — and it was they who did it — to have rushed in such haste to
consider the matter yesterday. The gentleman from Cook says
his speech was cut off yesterday; well, if he was ready then to
speak, why not now ? Now is the time for him to give it to us in
all its freshness, before it becomes rusty and stale. He would
vote against postponement.

Mr. CALDWELL was opposed to postponement. He could
see no object in it. He did not know how many were in favor of
postponement, but it was evident that if we postponed till Monday
next it will come up as a new question, and will have to be discussed
over and over again. Are we to have a subject discussed here for
days in committee of the whole, and then postpone the voting
and the debate for a week? If this was the case, we would not be
able to adjourn on the 25th, but may be here till the first of Octo-
ber. He called upon those in favor of finishing the business, and
of an early adjournment, to vote against any postponement.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, the section as it stood was
prohibition, and he was ready now to vote to sustain it. He was
satisfied with it, and wanted no further consideration.

Mr. FARWELL opposed the postponement.

Mr. ARMSTRONG was opposed to the postponement. He

66o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

called upon those in favor of adjourning on the 25th of August
to go against postponement. We had sent forth to the world
that the Convention would adjourn on that day, and let those
who were so clamorous for that measure now come forward and
show their hands.

Mr. PINCKNEY was in favor of postponement, in order to
give a fair opportunity to the friends of a good system of banking
to introduce a system that would be acceptable to the majority.

Mr. WOODSON moved the previous question.

The PRESIDENT said, the effect of the previous question
would be to cut off the motion to postpone.

The motion was then withdrawn.

Mr. KITCHELL said, he would not be influenced by party
calls. He was opposed to prohibition but would vote against
postponement, because he thought the Convention as ready now,
as at any time, to vote on the subject.

Mr. BROCKMAN addressed the committee in opposition to
postponement.

Mr. HAYES moved to lay the motion to postpone on the
table.

The yeas and nays were demanded and ordered. They
resulted as follows: yeas 70, nays 62. Carried.

The question recurred on the concurrence with the report of the
committee, and

Mr. LOGAN withdrew his amendment.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to add to the 4th section, as it now
stood, the following: "The Legislature shall prohibit, under
adequate penalties, the circulation of all bank notes in this state;
and all contracts founded upon, and payment made in, such notes
shall be void."

Mr. WILLIAMS said, that in order to make the experiment
complete, he desired to have nothing in circulation but hard
money.

Mr. WHITNEY despaired of a good bank, and would, there-
fore, go for the exclusion of all paper money, because the people
mostly desired a bank in the state for the purpose of excluding
from circulation the bank notes of other states. For this reason
he enlisted himself under the captain's command of his friend from

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 661

Adams, and would, therefore, vote for prohibition of paper money
in any shape.

Mr. DEMENT welcomed the gentlemen to the ranks of pro-
hibition, and if they were willing to mount the hard money and
prohibition pony, they should have the front seat.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean said, he was in favor of the proposition
of the gentleman from Cook, but from the vote just taken on the
motion to postpone, it was evident that banks would be prohibited,
and for the purpose of making the prohibition effectual he would
vote for the amendment of his friend from Adams. He would
prefer it, if it made the circulation of bank notes a penitentiary
offence.

Mr. LOUDON said, that he felt in good spirits as well as other
gentlemen. He would ask the member from Lee if he had any
more room on his pony! He felt like taking a ride this morning.
He was in favor of a well regulated system of banking, and if he
could not get that he would go for a total prohibition of banks, and
of paper money, in the state. He announced himself as a mem-
ber of the guard of the gentleman from Adams.

Mr. GEDDES announced himself as intending to follow the
same course.

Mr. SCATES advocated the amendment.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey was satisfied, from the misrepresenta-
tions by the gentleman from Montgomery of the proposition of
the gentleman from Cook, and the avidity with which they were
swallowed, that no good banking system could be carried in the
Convention. He would, therefore, vote for the amendment of the
gentleman from Adams. His constituents were in favor of a
system of safe banking, but as that could not be obtained he
would vote for the exclusion of all paper money in the state. The
gentleman from Montgomery could not, with the proposition of
the gentleman from Cook in his hand, if he was disposed to do it
justice, hold it up to the ridicule of the Convention, and state its
provisions so erroneously. He did not desire to speak disrespect-
fully of the gentleman, but he had not acted fairly.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery. Well, sir, if you do not speak
respectfully, I will make you do so.

662 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. KNAPP repeated his remarks upon the course of the
member from Montgomery.

[Mr. KNAPP: But, sir, I must be permitted to say, that to
me it appears impossible that the gentleman, holding in his hand,
as he did, the proposition of the gentleman from Cook, should
so entirely misunderstand that proposition. The gentleman knew
that the use of repudiated bonds could not, under any circum-
stances, have been contemplated. Sir, the gentleman knew, or
should have known, that the proposition contemplated the use of
bonds of any kind, only as a collateral security to the creditors in
general, and the bill holders in particular, and not as a basis or
capital for banking operations. It did contemplate the use of
bonds; but their credit, their character and their value, were all
distinctly set forth in the proposition itself; and none were to be
used but such as had regularly paid their interest, fully and punctu-
ally, for the three years preceding the time of making a deposit
of the same with such officer of the government as may be desig-
nated by law. This proposition, fair and safe as it appears to me,
seems not to have found favor with the convention — and I am
now convinced, that there is a disposition to dispense with bank-
ing altogether.

Sir, I am the more convinced of this when I observe the greedy
avidity with which these strange misrepresentations are caught
up, and if this be the determination, then, sir, I go for the proposi-
tion of the gentleman from Adams. If we are to have no banks
of our own, ought we to have and use the paper of the banks of
other States, with whose value and solvency, it is impossible for
us to have any accurate acquaintance.''

Is it not in consequence of using the bank paper of other
States that the people will be liable to suffer loss? It certainly
can not be in the mere existence of banks, irrespective of their
issues, that danger is to be apprehended.

Now, sir, if we are to have no banks of our own, let us pro-
hibit the use of bank paper altogether; this is our only consistent
course; let us prohibit its use, and that too by penalties entirely
adequate to secure its observance; then, if banks and bank issues
be indeed an evil, let us rid ourselves of that evil at once and

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 663

effectually; and this, sir, is the position I take. I assume it as
my alternative position, believing at the same time, that the
people of my county, and as I believe the majority of the people
of the entire State are in favor of a system of safe and restricted
banking, such an one as we might secure by adopting the prop-
osition which is now before the convention, proposed by the
gentleman from Cook, (Mr. Sherman.) But if the convention
think differently, I for one will bow submissively to their decision,
stipulating only, firmly but respectfully, that prohibition shall
extend to bank paper as well as banks.

The gentleman from Lee [Mr. Dement,] when he opened the
debate, declared it was no longer a question of principle. I was
sorry to hear the gentleman say so. I had supposed it a question
of principle.

Mr. DEMENT. I said it was a question of democratic princi-
ple.

Mr. KNAPP. Sir, I supposed it a democratic principle of
course, if indeed it were a question of principle at all. I supposed
that the democratic principle was entire opposition to —

Mr. DEMENT. I do not admit that. My position does not
lead to that conclusion. I say there is no fundamental principle
of democracy involved in the settlement of this question.

Mr. WILLIAMS. As I have been regularly installed leader,
I decide that the gentleman from Lee is right.

Mr. DEMENT. So let it be—

Mr. KNAPP. I know not who is foremost — who is leader;
but I am sorry to see the principle abandoned by the gentleman
from Lee, — especially as I had been led to suppose from the re-
peated declarations of gentlemen, that it was a principle of democ-
racy to do away with banking and bank issues altogether.

The gentleman from Brown (Mr. Brockman) on yesterday
characterized every system of banking as being anti-democratic;
and in his printed speech, has attempted to fortify this position,
by extracts from "Mansfield's PoHtical Grammar," "Conven-
tional Debates,' ' &c. &c. Sir, the value of this testimony is very
small indeed, when compared with other testimony which the
gentleman seems to have strangely overlooked. I mean, the

664 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

history of our own government, and our own most eminent states-
men, for the last thirty years.

Does the gentleman know who it was that drew up and sup-
ported most ably and successfully the charter of the late National
Bank in 1817? And does the gentleman know who it was that
drew up, and supported in the Senate of the United States in
1832, the bill or charter providing for its continuance? Does the
gentleman know who were its most able and devoted advocates?
If the gentleman does not know, he would do well to examine, and
he would soon find how much easier it is to assert a position than
to prove it true. The first Vice President under General Jackson,
then and now, one of the great leaders of democracy, was the
author and advocate of the first, and the present Vice President
of the United States was the author and advocate of the second,
and both were supported by the great leaders of democracy in the
United States. Is not this true? Does any gentleman deny it?
What, then, becomes of the assertion that every system of bank-
ing is anti-democratic? Now, I ask every candid man if it is
indeed true that banking is an exclusive whig measure? On the
contrary, is it not true that the democratic party have had more
power, all over the Union, to control this matter, than the whigs
have ever had? And what has been the result? Since the year
1832, when Gen. Jackson vetoed the United States Bank charter,
about three-fourths of all the bank charters in all the States of this
Union, have been established, whether for good or evil, by State
legislatures having large democratic majorities. — There is no deny-
ing the truth of this. Facts justify the assertion — and I appeal
with perfect confidence to the history of the times. Hence it will
be seen that the gentleman from Lee was indeed right when he
said that no fundamental principle of democracy was involved in
the settlement of this question.

Now, sir, I am willing, as one of the whig party, to bear my
reasonable proportion of the odium arising from being favorably
inclined towards a safe and well guarded system of banking, if,
indeed, any odium can fairly arise from being so inclined; but, sir,
I am not willing, and will not bear any more than my just and
equitable proportion; and this proportion shall not be fixed by
every empty headed declaimer; but by an appeal to facts

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 665

— and by the results of this appeal, I am entirely willing
to abide.

Sir, I am in favor of a safe and well founded system of bank-
ing;— a system which shall, under every possible state of circum-
stances, keep the bill-holder entirely safe in the use of its notes;
and such a system I am quite sure could be established; but, sir,
I will never consent to the establishment of any bank in this State,
without first submitting the act of its incorporation to the peo-
ple for their vote.. If they adopt it, 'tis well;— if not, I have not
a word to say; but will bow, as every good citizen should bow, to
the suprerriacy of public sentiment.

But if this Convention shall insist upon a prohibitory clause,
positive and absolute, — then, sir, I fall back upon my alternate
position. I will insist upon prohibiting all bank issues as well as
banks themselves, as contemplated in the proposition of the gen-
tleman from Adams. Any other course would be a reflection upon
either the capacity or integrity of the people of this State.

Who dares say that we possess not the capacity to create, or
the integrity to control, as well at least as our neighbors, banking
institutions, for our convenience? And inserting a prohibitory
clause in our amended constitution would, in my judgment, be as
insulting to their intelligence, as it would be distrustful of their
integrity.

I confess that I had supposed we might be able to offer for the
acceptance of the people, some system that might meet the gen-
eral wish, and as I believe, the general expectation. I still hope
we may yet be able to do so, but from the proceedings of this day
and yesterday, I am compelled to admit, that my hopes are
mingled with many apprehensions. And if a prohibitory clause,
operating alike on banks and bank issues, in any and every form,
shall be made a part of this constitution, we shall present to the
people of this State an issue, that will most assuredly lead to its
inevitable rejection. I hope gentlemen will pause before they
insist, — will ponder well the consequences before they place the
matter beyond their own control. — It may, or may not be best,
ultimately to establish banks in this State; there can be no harm,
however, in submitting the question to- the people themselves,
and in whatever way they may decide, I pledge my own acqui-

666 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

escence in that decision, without a question, and without a mur-

mur.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery replied. The gentleman from
Jersey had expressed his astonishment of his misrepresentations
of the system of banking proposed by a member from Cook. He
did not know, nor did he care, in what light that member viewed
his remarks upon that stock-broker's scheme for swindling.
That member also said this Convention gulped all he had said
down with great avidity. Now, it was strange that this Conven-
tion had not the great wisdom, and power of perception, possesed
by the member from Jersey, or as that member thought he had.
Mr. D. was no phrenologist, but from what that gentleman had
said, he should judge, and it was evident to all, that the bump of
self-esteem was strongly developed. Instead of showing up the
benefits of this system, he has amused us with a lecture upon his
better powers of perception. But it was not strange. He told us,
some weeks ago, that he looked for the time when farmers and
doctors, &c., not lawyers, would be on the bench of the supreme
court, and that they, would make good judges. Now, he was a
good, scientific, physician: wonder if he will, when he gets there,
allow a steam doctor to sit along side of him? Mr. D. then said,
that he and his friend from Adams had acted together yesterday,
but he was sorry he would have to leave him to-day. That gen-
tleman represents a whig county and a democratic one. The
democrats of his county had instructed him to go for prohibition,
and he would do it; but it was not democratic doctrine to exclude
all banknotes, under penalties, from circulation. They were
opposed to the present law, in that respect. But if the democrats
here thought the people would sustain them, let them go for it.
The whigs could vote for it with safety, as their constituents
would understand the vote; but the democrats could not do the
same. The whigs risk nothing in this, but the democrats much.

Mr. NORTHCOTT said, he was a whig, but as the gentleman
from Montgomery had dropped off the pony, he asked for his seat.
He was sent here as a whig. He was objected to by his opponent,
because he would have no influence with tender footed democrats,

''This speech by Knapp is taken from the Sangamo /owrna/, September 3.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 667

but he was now in the same place as that opponent would be
were he here; and desired his place on the pony. He was once a
bank man but would now go for prohibition, as a good banking
system could not be carried.

Mr. PINCKNEY would vote for prohibition, but it should go
in on the largest scale. The total exclusion of all paper money
from circulation should be a part of it. The result would be
undoubted — the rejection of the constitution.

Mr. SHERMAN said, he would vote for the amendment, not
because he believed it could be carried into effect, but because it
could do no harm. — There was no power in any state to prevent
a man receiving what he thought proper — even a white piece of
paper — for his goods or property. The gentleman from Mont-
gomery read the proposition he (Mr. S.) presented to the Conven-
tion, and made a great splutter over it. I was surprised that he,
a professional man, would make such a statement of its provisions
as he did. If he was a mechanic, like him (Mr. S.), the matter
would be different; but a lawyer to criticize it as he did, was strange.
He read a few words, commented upon them, and then skipped,
as a lawyer always does, in order not to meet the question fairly.
He would refer him to the fourth section: it provides that, before
one dollar is issued, 150,000 must be paid in. When he says there
is no specie clause, he says what is not the true interpretation.
The clause [provides] that fifty thousand dollars must be paid in in
specie-paying bonds, as collateral security. This is the true reading
of it. The gentleman from Lee had insinuated that he and the gentle-
man from Sangamon had made a party arrangement to carry this
proposition; but when the gentleman from Adams came to the
aid of the member from Lee, he was willing that he should mount
the pony, and the member from Lee was willing to mount behind,
or even to hold on to the tail. Mr. S. said he cared nothing for
banks himself; he could make more money if there were none,
and so could men who had means.

Mr. LOGAN said he went most heartily in favor of the amend-
ment of the member from Adams. He favored it in good faith,
as an adjunct proposition to prohibition, not as a weight to break
it down and defeat the constitution, but as a proper requirement
upon prohibition. Mr. L. then made a long statement of the

668 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

evils to the state of bank notes from other states being in circula-
tion here.

Mr. ADAMS moved the previous question, and it was
seconded.

The question was on the amendment of Mr. Williams. The
yeas and nays being ordered and taken, it was carried — yeas 90,
nays 41.

The question being then on concurring with the committee of
the whole in their amendments to the report, as just amended by
Mr. Williams,

Mr. CALDWELL asked for a division on the amendment to
the first section, (proposed in committee by Mr. Scates,) and the
Convention refused to concur therein — yeas 53, nays 78.

There was no amendment to the 2d section.

The addition of the words, "to be hereafter created," to the
3d section, was concurred in.

The additional section offered by Mr. Edwards of Sangamon,
and adopted in committee, was rejected — yeas 47, nays 83.

The 4th section was then taken up. The question was on
concurring with the committee in striking out all after "granted,"
and inserting Mr. Williams' amendment. The yeas and nays
were demanded and taken, and the Convention refused to concur —
yeas 47, nays 86.

The question then was on concurring with the committee in
striking out the two last sections of the report — pending which,
the Convention adjourned till 3 o'clock, p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. WOODSON moved a call of the Convention — ordered and
made.

The question was taken on concurring with the committee in
striking out the two last sections of the report, and decided in the
negative — yeas 56, nays 69, and the report of the committee on
Incorporations stood as when first reported.

Mr. DUNLAP moved to strike out all after the third section
and insert the following:

"No act of the legislature granting any special charter of
incorporation for banking purposes, nor any general act of incor-

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 669

poration for such purposes, shall be in force or of any effect unless
the same shall, at the next general election after its passage be
submitted to a vote of the people, nor unless a majority of those
voting (for and against it) be cast in favor of the act at such elec-
tion shall vote."

The question was first taken on striking out — and decided in
the affirmative — yeas 84.

Mr. DEMENT said, that he sincerely hoped the proposition
just offered would be adopted. He had been satisfied for some
time, that it would be impossible to engraft in the constitution any
prohibitory clause. This proposition was the next best thing
to prohibition, and the best we can get. For one, he was willing to
cast his vote for it, and not fear the responsibility of the act.
Everything that could be done for prohibition had been tried, and
he hoped its friends would fall back on this as the next best.

Mr. ARMSTRONG offered a proviso: that said bank should
provide for the redemption of its notes in specie at Alton, Quincy
and Chicago.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to lay the proviso on the table; and
it was laid on the table — yeas 90, nays 40.

Mr. ARCHER said: He would inquire of the gentleman from
Morgan, if he designed this amendment as a substitute for the
remainder of the report after section third? If so, he hoped the
amendment would prevail, after the ride we had taken this morn-
ing. The prohibition pony had broken down with us, and when
he consented to take the ride on the pony with the gentleman from
Adams he thought that gentleman was a skillful reinsman. He
had been mistaken. From the unskillful driving of the gentleman
from Adams or some other cause, he could hardly tell what, the
pony, starting with a fair prospect of success, had broken down
and thrown us in the mud. He had intended, if the pony had
held out to the end of the race, to move to present the labors of
the pony to the people as a separate article.

Mr. HAYES offered the following as an amendment to the
proposition:

"Provided, that after a bank charter or banking law shall
have been submitted to the people, no other bank charter or

670 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

banking law shall be passed by the general assembly, until after
the expiration of five years."

Messrs. HARVEY and KITCHELL expressed themselves in
favor of the amendment of Mr. Dunlap.

Mr. WEAD regretted that the question was presented in its
present aspect. He never had much confidence in the gentleman
from Adams as a leader, but expected more from the foresight and
experience of the gentleman from Lee. He never expected to see
the gentleman from Lee voting with the whig party on the bank
question. But circumstances make strange bed fellows, and it is
a matter he could not understand. If any agreement has been
made, it is strange the member from Lee would vote for the present
plan. What is it? It gives the legislature power to gratify all
the applications for private and special acts of incorporation that
may be made. The same old system of special legislation. Every
year applications will be made, bribes oflFered, &c., by gentlemen
with wealth, who may desire a private bank charter. Was it not
sufficient for him, in giving up prohibition, to require them to
submit to general laws? Was he obliged to go over body and
soul to the other party? Does he give them up all restrictions
over private incorporations? If the legislature is to have this
power, every feeling of patriotism should dictate that the statute
books should not be overcharged with acts of private bank charters.
This is a greater power than has been granted by any state in the
union that has changed her constitution for years. If the power
was to grant general acts, then the friends of prohibition would
have some chance. But if passed in its present shape they will
be unable to watch all the twistings and turnings of the friends
of those private acts. If the gentleman from Lee and his co-
adjutor from Adams have made this arrangement, he hoped this
house would crush it, and that some regard would be paid to the
public interests, and the rights and sentiments of the people
would be protected.

Mr. DEMENT was opposed to the amendment of the gentle-
man from White. He was sorry to have fallen so far from the
high place in the opinion of the gentleman from Fulton, as it
seemed he had. This proposition does not prevent the member
from Fulton to get in what he wants. This, sir, is the best thing.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 671

after prohibition, that can be attained from this Convention, for
the interests of the people. Here the law will have to be submitted
to the people. Again, at the election for the legislature, the
question can be made of bank or no bank, and it will be submitted
to the candidates, and they will be elected to carry out the instruc-
tions of the people; and again, the charter must be submitted to
them for an approval. The people are thus doubly protected.
This does not prevent the member from Fulton from getting in
anything of which he has the slightest chance. He says that he
has lost confidence in me as a leader; well I can't help it. As to
voting with the whig party, I will be only glad that they will vote
with me, but I am afraid they will not. I will, anyhow, vote for it
as the best I can get. The gentleman from Adams did not do us so
much harm by mounting our pony. The gentleman from Fulton
and myself had run him down and wind-galled him, and I was
willing that the gentleman from Adams should mount him. If he
got on his neck and was thrown over, we all fell together, and I
was not sure, and for all I heard I did not doubt but what the
gentleman from Fulton was killed in the fall. I do not understand
the purpose as denying general banking, and I am not prepared to
say that I am in favor of general banking laws.

Well, allow them to have this bank charter passed — and then
at the election we can take a town meeting view of the question,
and the gentleman can take hold of their charter, and show up
its deformity to the people.

Mr. LOGAN advocated the proposition as a true democratic
plan, one based upon true republican doctrine.

Mr. SERVANT would vote for the proposition as a compromise,
and styled the gentleman who offered it as the great "Pacificator,"
and sterling "democrat" of the Convention.

Mr. BROCKMAN opposed it as infinitely worse than the old
constitution, as under this five hundred banks might be created.

Mr. FARWELL said, that this plan was the most plausible
and fair upon its face, but the basest in its effects that could be
devised. It throws the door open to unrestricted banking by
the legislature, and all its devastating evils. It was said that
the question was left to the people to decide upon having a bank.

He had as much confidence in the intelligence of the people

672 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

as any one, but they have been deceived; they have been led off
by the glowing pictures of gentlemen before, and that was in the
great internal improvement system.

He had said before, and said now, that he had no confidence
in the honesty of the legislature, when they are liable to be influ-
enced by banking institutions.

The gentleman from Sangamon says that the doctrine of
banking is not confined to the whig party. If there be a differ-
ence in the two parties it is on this question of banks. The
gentleman from Knox has said on two different occasions that
hostility to banks is no principle of the democratic party! Has
he read anything? Has it not been inscribed high and brilliantly
upon every democratic banner that has floated to the breeze for
the last ten years? Has he read the proceedings of the democratic
meetings and conventions, for general and county officers? Has
it not been published at the head of every democratic paper in
the state? Has it not been published in all the democratic text
books? He must be ignorant of the history of this state, or he
would not venture such assertions.

Mr. McCALLEN advocated the proposition.

Mr. SCATES opposed the amendment and declared himself in
favor of prohibition to the last. — He would follow the lead of the
gentleman from Lee no longer.

Mr. HAYES withdrew his amendment and moved to strike out
the words "for or against be cast," and insert "at such elections."
He did this in order that the whole people might have a decision
of the question. If this was adopted he would vote for the prop-
osition. He denied that the people of the state required or
expected banks at our hands. He defended prohibition as a
just principle, as much so as any other restriction upon legislation.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery gave a detailed account of the
various battles prohibition had gone through under the lead of
the gentlemen from Jefferson, Lee and Adams; and commented upon
the varied results of the conflicts, and the final doom it was about
to receive. He would vote for this, he would vote for anything
in preference to the Wall street stock jobber's scheme of the
gentleman from Cook, which he hated worse than sin itself.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1847 673

Mr. WILLIAMS replied to Mr. Hayes, and then gave an
account of his progress as commander of the prohibition forces.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall moved the previous question,
which was seconded. The question was upon the amendment of
Mr. Hayes, and the vote was first taken on striking out. The
yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted — yeas 72, nays 60; and
then on inserting — yeas 92, nays 40.

Mr. WEAD moved the Convention adjourn. — Lost.

The question then was taken by yeas and nays on inserting the
proposition of Mr. Dunlap as amended, and it was rejected —
yeas 66, nays 66.

So the report of the committee on Incorporations remained
as first reported— »n'««5 the three last sections.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison (by leave) presented the report
of the majority of the select committee of twenty-seven on the
Judiciary.

Mr. DEMENT presented the minority report of same commit-
tee.

Mr. DAWSON (for Mr. Minshall) presented a minority
report from same committee.

And the reports were laid on the table and 250 copies ordered
to be printed.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery entered a motion to reconsider the
vote rejecting Mr. Dunlap's proposition.

Mr. LOGAN entered a motion to reconsider the vote adopting
Mr. Hayes' amendment thereto.

And then the Convention adjourned.

XLVII. THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847

Mr. CASEY asked a suspension of the rules to move the
rescinding of the latter past of the 17th rule, which requires a
motion to reconsider to be laid over; and the rules were suspended
and the part of the rule was rescinded.

The question pending was on the motion to reconsider the vote
by which Mr. Dunlap's proposition, as amended, was rejected;
and being taken by yeas and nays, was decided in the negative —
yeas 61, nays 69.

Mr. LOGAN offered as an amendment to be inserted after
section three, the following:

Sec. 4. No corporation for banking purposes shall be per-
mitted to issue bank notes, to an amount exceeding three-fourths
the amount of the capital stock actually paid in.

Sec. 5. No such corporation shall be permitted to issue any
bank notes unless the same shall have been first countersigned and
registered by the Treasurer of this state.

Sec. 6. No such notes shall be issued until such corporation
shall deposit with the Treasurer the amount of such notes in stock
of the United States, or such of the states as shall, for three years
next preceding, have paid the interest on their bonds, provided,
that the bonds of this state may be received as such deposit, at
such proportion of their nominal value as the interest paid by the
state on such bonds for the three years immediately preceding
such deposite, may bear to six per cent.

Sec. 7. No bank shall be permitted to issue any paper until
one-third of the capital stock of said bank shall be paid in in specie.

Sec. 8. In case of insolvency of any bank, the bill-holders
shall be entitled to priority in payment.

Sec. 9. Non-payment of specie shall, in all cases, be a forfei-
ture of the charter, and the Legislature shall have no power to
remit said forfeiture.

Sec. 10. No bank shall be established with a less capital than
674

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 675

one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, nor with a greater capital
than six hundred thousand dollars.

Mr. GREGG moved to add to the amendment, as an additional
section, the following:

"No act of the General Assembly authorizing corporations or
associations with banking powers, in pursuance of the foregoing
provisions, shall go into effect, or in any manner be in force, unless
the same shall be submitted to the people at the general election
next succeeding the passage of the same, and be approved by a
majority of all the votes cast at such election."

Mr. THOMAS moved to lay the amendment on the table. On
which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted— yeas
46, nays 86.

Mr. LOGAN then withdrew his amendment.

Mr. DEMENT renewed the same with Mr. Gregg's proposed
amendment embodied therewith.

Mr. WOODSON moved to add thereto after the words "such
election," the words "for or against such act."

Mr. GREGG said: I desire to inquire why it is that gentlemen
who, but a day or two since, were loud in their professions of confi-
dence in the people are now unwilling to trust them? What new
light has beamed upon their understandings? What new visions
have been displayed to their wondering gaze? Not long since
certain gentlemen were soundly lectured on account of the restric-
tions they proposed upon future legislative action. They were
told that the people knew how to take care of their own interests —
that there was no danger of the adoption of destructive measures
as long as the principle of popular supervision was preserved.
Then, the people were fit to be trusted with everything — there
was no limit to their virtue, their intelligence, or their capacity!
It was almost treason to place any thing like restrictions in the
constitution. The gentleman from Sangamon (Mr. Logan) went
so far as to challenge members of the Convention to go against
the amendment of the gentleman from Morgan, (Mr Dunlap),
and triumphantly asked them if they were willing to deny to the
people the privilege of determining for themselves what was cal-
culated to promote their interests. He was fierce in support of
that amendment and labored hard to procure its adoption. But

676 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

what, sir, was its peculiar way of arriving at the popular sanction?
It provided that simply a majority of those voting for and against
any banking act passed by the legislature, should be sufficient to
give it effect. No majority of the people was required. If but a
thousand votes were cast upon the subject, a majority of that
number would impose upon the state a system of banking. This
scheme of popular sanction was all proper and just. It was
exceedingly democratic to enable a minority to make laws for the
majority! Now, sir, I ask you to look at the other side of the
picture. The amendment of the gentleman from White (Mr.
Hayes) was adopted. It required any banking law, proposed by
the legislature, to be sanction[ed] by a majority of the people before it
could go into effect. This did not suit the gentleman from Sanga-
mon, and those who acted with him. O no! Their confidence
in the popular capacity was great, but it did not go quite so far!
Anything but a majority for them! The people were wise and
honest, but the wisdom was all on the side of the minority! Most
admirable consistency! Now these gentlemen oppose any thing
that contains the full and unqualified majority principle. They
are ready to go for projects falling short of this — for a partial
popular sanction, which may embrace only a small minority, and
entirely subvert the popular will. Now I desire some explanation
of this change of position. I call upon gentlemen to define their
new position. I inquire why it is that their confidence in the
people has so suddenly vanished? Can they tell me what deadly
principle of evil exists in a provision requiring the sanction of a
majority of the whole people to a proposition having the strongest
possible bearing upon their interests? For one, I am willing to
support almost any proposition which allows the people of the state
to approve or reject such banking projects as the legislature may
submit to their consideration. Any thing for me, is better than
entire legislative discretion upon this subject. But I fear that
to this complexion it will come at last. Some gentlemen are
so strenuous in supporting entire prohibition when they know it
cannot be obtained, that I am much apprehensive they will con-
tribute largely to aid those who wish to leave banking as an open
question, entirely free to legislative action. Are they unable to
perceive the result to which their action tends? Can they not

TH URSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 677

look forward and perceive that if the evils of unrestrained banking
are inflicted upon the people of the state, they stand in a position
to be in some degree responsible for the existence of those evils?
The amendment of the gentleman from Greene (Mr. Woodson)
proposes merely a limited popular sanction for such banking acts
as may pass the legislature. It falls short of a submission to the
whole people, and I am therefore opposed to it. It of course suits
the views of the gentleman from Sangamon, (Mr. Logan,) and
those who act with him. It comes up to their notions of popular
capacity and right, and they will not go beyond it. It will enable
a minority of the voters of the state to give law to the majority.
For my own part I am opposed to all such projects, and I like to
see gentlemen who profess to respect, love, and venerate the
people, have consistency enought to be willing to trust them.

Mr. WOODSON advocated his amendment as the only just
mode of taking a vote upon the question. Those who did not
vote either for or against the proposition of a bank should not be
counted as against a bank.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean argued on the same side. He thought
it an unjust principle that those who had not a sufficient interest
in the question to induce them to vote either way, should be
counted against the bill.

Mr. SCATES opposed the amendment as it did not require
a majority of the whole people in its favor. It was the old system
of unrestricted banking, disguise it as they would. Like the ass
in the lion's skin, it perhaps might have passed by undiscovered,
when the gentleman from Morgan (Mr. Dunlap) offered it
yesterday, but we heard him (Mr. McCallen) attempt to roar
here yesterday, and he was discovered. The member from White,
tore off his covering and showed the full length of his auricular
organs. To-day the gentleman from Greene is endeavoring to
put on his covering again by his amendment, which is but a
pretended popular vote.

Mr. HURLBUT was in favor of the amendment as presenting
the only just mode of ascertaining the choice of the people.

Mr. KITCHELL said, on yesterday, when the question now
under consideration was presented by the gentleman from White,
(Mr. Hayes), he found himself voting in the minority, and differ-

678 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ently from most of his political friends, and from many who are
striving for the same result as himself. The vote was taken in
silence, without discussion; and, at first, seeing the large majority
against me, I thought possibly I might have voted wrong, but I
have since reflected upon it, and I cannot bring myself to believe
that my vote was wrong. As the question now comes up again,
it is but proper that I should, briefly, give the reasons of my vote.
Sir, I have endeavored in all the proceedings on the bank question
to act consistently. I have opposed absolute prohibition, because
I am satisfied that such is the wish of my constituents; and in
doing so I do not compromise any principle, nor my personal
opposition to banks. I seek to represent truly the wishes of my
constituents when I know them, and not my own — for I am not a
bank man. Some general restrictions I deem absolutely necessary;
and the first and all-important one is the one, offered by the
gentleman from Morgan, Mr. Dunlap, requiring the submission
of the law creating banks to a direct vote of the people. I have
been for this all the time, and I believe my votes will all be found
perfectly consistent on the subject. Nor have I been found with
the extremes of either party — neither with those for unqualified
prohibition, who are mostly of my own party, nor with those who
are for leaving the question open and unsettled, so that the Legis-
lature may create and establish, without restraint, any kind of
banks, for which I believe most of the whigs are striving. And is it
not a little remarkable to observe, on yesterday and to-day, how
these extremes have come together; how the most ultra prohibi-
tionists and those who are for no restraint, and no prohibition,
are now voting and acting side by side.'' But, sir, I will recur to
the question I rose to speak of, and what is it? The amendment
of the gentleman from Cook (Mr. Gregg) embraces a provision
(the same offered yesterday by the gentleman from White)
requiring a majority of all the votes given at a general election
to be in favor of the bank law, or else it should fail — in a word,
that those who are careless, who have no opinion, who will not
examine the matter, and who will not vote at all, shall be put down
as voting against it.

Sir, this is an important principle, and before it is to find a
place in our new constitution should be examined. The amend-

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 679

ment of the gendeman from Greene (Mr. Woodson) proposes to
let the law stand or fall by the majority voting /or or against it.
and why not leave it so? By what right do we say that all who
do not vote at all are against it? It is true that in changing our
constitution — our organic law — a majority of all the votes polled
for representatives, &c., is required. But the people have been
very cautious about changing the constitution, and have required
such modes as will secure great deliberation and prudence. A
bank law is a far different thing from a constitution. There are
some of the eastern states that require an individual to obtain a
majority of all the votes given for the office, in order to be elected —
that is to say, if there be six candidates for Congress, or Governor,
one shall receive more votes than all the other five, to be elected.
This is an inconvenient rule, and one not adopted in our state
government. We act upon the principle, that in the exercise
of the right of suffrage no man is absolutely bound to vote; that
it is a duty he may omit, but that if he will not vote, will not par-
ticipate in the election of officers, and in the powers of government,
he must submit, and does submit, to the majority of those that
do. This principle is recognized and practiced, I believe, every
where else. Why is it proposed on this question alone to set
down every man who does not vote at all, as opposed to the law?
Are there no other questions of equal importance? Why not say
that no judge, no congressman, no Governor, shall be elected
without a majority of all the votes in the district or state? That
the application of this principle, on this question, will be very
acceptable to those who are for entire prohibition, is very likely,
for it would certainly go very far towards utter prohibition. But
it is unnecessary to engraft this new principle upon our constitu-
tion, on this single question.

Let me ask, further, whether this proposition is practicable?
It provides that the act of the Legislature creating banks shall be
submitted to the people at the next general election, and unless a
majority of all the votes given at that election be in favor of the
act it shall fail. Pray what votes are to be counted? Those for
justices of the peace, for sheriffs, for judges, for what officers? It
is not certain that we shall have any state officers to elect at such
elections. And how, then, are you to find out how many votes it

68o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

will take to be a majority of all the votes at such election ? Turn it
as you may, and there will be no better criterion to judge of the
expression of public opinion, than will be afforded by the vote
upon the bank question alone. Mr. President, I was in hopes,
yesterday, that the proposition of the gentleman from Morgan
would be accepted by the Convention, untrammelled, as a com-
promise measure upon which a large majority might agree. But, sir,
when the amendment of the gentleman from White (and now
again proposed) was offered, I did regard it as a death blow to that
proposition. I am still more satisfied to-day that that principle
will prove fatal to the proposition of leaving the law to the people
at all. Sir, from the position of the whole subject now, I cannot
form any opinion as to what will be the result of the matter.

Mr. CALDWELL said that upon this question he desired to
make a few remarks. He had not occupied much of the time of
the Convention since its meeting, nor participated to any extent
in the discussions that have taken place. There were many
reasons why he had not done so, why he had not participated in
the discussions. Sometimes the previous question was called upon
to cut off discussion, and also others have been more fortunate in
catching the eye and the ear of the speaker, than he had, owing
possibly to the better position of their seats. This question of
prohibition had not been so fairly before the Convention, upon
its real merits, till now; and it was due to himself and his con-
stituents that he should say something upon it, and this, it was
evident from what has been said, will be the last opportunity of
expressing his views upon the subject. The question of banks
was one of the greatest importance to the people, and to their
interests. His convictions were entirely against them in any
shape or form, and were in favor of a prohibition of them to be
engrafted in the constitution, and that was also the conviction
and sentiments of his constituents. The gentleman from Rich-
land (Mr. Kitchell) opposes prohibition, on the ground that it is
the democratic doctrine that the people have the right to say at
any time whether they will have this or that law, or whether banks
shall exist here or shall not. Why, sir, when prohibition was first
proposed here in the Convention, it was offered in a form, whereby
an alternate proposition of prohibition or not, might be submitted

THURSDAY, AUGUST s, iS47 68 1

to the people for their choice and approval. Why did he not
then vote to sustain that proposition ? Why was that suffered to
drop by these gentlemen for the plan now before us? Much has
been said here about submitting banks to the people in bills to be
passed by future legislatures, and by those who declare themselves
in favor of prohibition and opposed to banks: why did they refuse
to submit to the people a question of bank or no bank, and the
decision thereon to be engrafted in the constitution? Why have
they, who talk so much about submitting the question to the
people, uniformly voted against a proposition presenting an
alternate prohibition to the people, thus showing a manifest want
of sincerity in their professions of submitting to the decision of the
people. The gentlemen now have declared themselves in favor of
this proposition as a compromise. Sir, when this convention first
assembled, long before this compromise which has been effected
between the gentleman from Lee and the gentleman from Adams-
got up in a way I cannot understand, the friends of prohibition were
in favor of a compromise, upon the grounds and in the manner he
had just stated. When his (Mr. C.'s) convictions pointed him
to a certain principle he would consent to no compromise of that
principle. The friends of prohibition held it as a correct principle
and they could not compromise upon the subject, by voting for
a banking system. He was willing to submit it to the people as a
proposition to be voted for by them separately, but never to
sustain a compromise like the one before us, and which at the time
excited his suspicions as to the mode in which it was brought about.
When, on the day before yesterday, the gentleman from Lee and
the gentleman from Adams commenced the exchange of compli-
ments, and installed each other as leaders of the prohibition party,
he could not understand it; but to-day a compromise has been
effected by them, which the gentleman from Lee supports, and
how that was brought about, or what means were resorted to, he
confessed he did not know. Sir, we had prohibition in the com-
mittee of the whole, and we carried it through like a flash, but as
soon as we get back into the house, it is defeated. How this result
was brought about, he could not see; whether it was the result of
any concert for that purpose by gentlemen, or by accident, he knew
not, but such was the fact. Again, as soon as we get out of com-

682 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

mittee, prohibition is defeated, and then comes the proposition of
the gentleman from Morgan, offered as a compromise, and the
gentleman from Lee votes for it, and speaks in its favor. He knew
not if any arrangement or concert had been made between gentle-
men, but, sir, from what the member from McLean has said, it
would appear that there was something rotten in Denmark. Sir,
this is strange. That proposition had some ear marks about it,
that spoke the source whence it came. It had the stamp of the
gentleman from Sangamon upon it; it had his seal and signet upon
its features. And this is the proposition which the friends of pro-
hibition accept as a compromise!

There had been much said against prohibition as an unjust
principle, and doctrines had been advocated and preached here
which appeared strange to him. It was denied that there is any
principle of right to sustain prohibition. Look, sir, around your
wide spread state, look at all the varied and distinct interests
of the country, at its manufacturing, commercial, agricultural and
other important interests, and he asked what was government
established for? Is it not for the purpose of regulating the rights
of those interests, and to protect one from the other, to secure each
from the power and encroachments of the other? and how was this
to be done? By placing proper limits and bounds to the powers
and privileges of these respective interests, in relation to the others.
What is your bill of rights? which secures men in their lives and
liberties, but a restraint upon the government in the exercise of its
power over men. What are the exemptions we have placed in the
constitution, whereby the property of our people to the amount of
one hundred dollars is released from taxation, but a restraint
upon the power of wealth and money from destroying the liberties
of the poor? and when we propose a prohibition of banks, what
is it? We propose nothing but a restraint upon the monied
power and influence of the country from establishing institutions
here to swallow up the rest. There is a manifest tendency on the
part of the money power of the land to become the sole rulers and
governors of the different interests of the country, and it was our
duty to restrain it. In no way could this be better done than by a
prohibition of banks. Mr. C.'s time expired at this moment and
he could pursue the subject no longer.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 683

Mr. LOGAN said, it was exceedingly unfortunate that the
proposition of the gentleman from Morgan had been in his (Mr.
L.'s) hand writing as, after it had been offered and the general
feeling was in its favor, and the discussion going on, it was whis-
pered about the room that it was in his hand writing, and
that no doubt contributed to its defeat. But it happened not to
be his proposition. It was the same as was offered on yesterday
by the gentleman from Randolph, (? — see proposition of Mr.
RoBBiNS, in Wednesdays proceedings) and had been copied
from that. Its paternity therefore was entirely democratic.
Mr. L. then argued at length in favor of Mr. Woodson's amend-
ment.

Mr. DEMENT said, he desired to say a few words in reply
to what had been said by the gentleman from Gallatin, this
morning, in relation to his course on the question of prohibition.
Mr. D. came there a friend of prohibition, fought for it long,
battled for it in its first, its second, third, fourth and fifth defeat,
had presented himself under its banner at every fight, had thrown
himself into every breach, and would never desert it until
driven from it, and then he only retired with his face to the foe,
and took up the next best position. Where, during all these con-
tests, has been the gentleman from Gallatin? He has lain low,
secreted in his ambuscade, and has not been heard of till the battle
is over. The breast of the enemy has never been bruised by the
force of his blows, it has never been pierced by his spear, or
an arrow from his bow. He has laid hid in his ambuscade, while
the fight was going on, when every arm was needed, and now when
we are defeated, he has come out — sneaked out of his hiding place,
and has risen a tall warrior in the cause, and his first bow is bent
at the bosoms of his friends ! His first blow, after his long inaction,
is directed against the friends of prohibition. In his disordered
imagination, he thinks the friends of that cause have abandoned
their principle, when in fact, they have only, after a signal defeat,
fallen back upon the next best position. In his disordered imagina-
tion— which Mr. D. did not envy — he thinks, and says there is
something very suspicious in manoeuvering with the gentleman
from Adams. He mistakes a few jocular remarks which passed
between us yesterday, made more for the amusement of the

684 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Convention, than any thing else, and he sets it down that there
is something wrong between us.

Mr. CALDWELL said, he did not say so.

Mr. DEMENT. Well, he said it was very suspicious. What
was our condition? We had fallen from fifty-four or fifty-eight,
down to fifty, to forty-nine, then to forty-seven; every day we
were becoming less in numbers; at that time, and after a severe
contest, in which we were again defeated, the gentleman from
Adams came to our aid, and offered us his vote. Reduced in
numbers, and though not expecting success, we took him and his
vote, and looked for more. That gentleman, however, came to
the support of prohibition alone, and we have again been defeated.
And this the gentleman says, appears suspicious. Mr. D. liked
not the man who is always suspicious of his friendsj one who will
turn upon them instead of the enemy, and draw his bow. And
that, too, when he was one who never pulled a trigger in defence
of the cause which he says has been deserted for a suspicious
compromise. Mr. D. never gave up, he never abandoned his
principles, had never gone over to their opponents. He had been
disastrously beaten and had been forced to retire. When he was
unable to hold his castle or his fortress, he would take up a medium
position: if pressed by the enemy, and driven from there, he
would take to the log cabin, and occupy that, if he could have no
better. Such is not, however, the policy of the gentleman from
Gallatin. — He wars upon his friends for so doing; he has risen here,
when we are struggling for the next best thing after prohibition,
and in a mean pettifogging manner, has alluded to the jocular
remarks which have passed between the gentleman from Adams
and myself, and has endeavored, by insinuations, to hold me up
to the Convention, and to the country, as one deserting my prin-
ciples and my party, and as making some corrupt bargain with
the gentleman from Adams. — Mr. D. said that he would ever stand
firm and true to the democratic and republican doctrine. If the
member from Adams, or the member from Sangamon, or any of
their party come to our aid and vote with us, he would never leave
his own party, and turn around and fight them, because those
members were on the right side. He had always been in favor of
prohibition, from the first to the last. When it was first rejected

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 685

by a large majority, he had, in his remarks to the Convention, said
that probably a compromise might be made with those of the
democratic party who would not vote for it, that might be satis-
factory; and an union effected that would answer in case
prohibition could not be obtained. He never had heard the gen-
tleman's views before, he had never received any intimation of
what they were, and he knew nothing till now of the gentleman's
opinions, other than that he was in favor of prohibition.

Mr. D. was in favor of the plan which he had submitted, with-
out the amendment of Mr. Woodson. — It was true, that it con-
tained a system of banking, but in a most restricted form, and as
it required, before any bank charter could become a law, that it
should be submitted to the people, and to be approved by a major-
ity of the whole people, it was, in his opinion, very near an effectual
prohibition, or was, at least, the nearest thing to prohibition that
we had any chance of obtaining.

Mr. HAYES advocated the adoption of the proposition
submitted by the gentleman from Lee. He was now, and had been
throughout, in favor of prohibition. He was opposed to banks in
any shape or form; he looked upon them as an evil of the worst
character, and one which we should avoid above all others. But
prohibition could not be carried, as the votes of the last few days
have clearly shown. What, then, was the best course to follow?
Abandon the subject, or leave to the friends of banking a Legisla-
ture free to act, to create as many and of what kind of banks it
pleased? Or to adopt in the constitution such restrictions as
would check the evils of banking, and then depend on the addition-
al clause, that the charter shall be submitted to the whole people
for their approval, as a complete check. This was the best we
could now expect to obtain. Should we leave the subject open
to the Legislature? No one seemed to think this desirable.
Then, how could the member from Gallatin reconcile it with his
views of the subject to oppose this plan of restrictions upon the
Legislature? He could understand the course of the friends of
banks, they were consistent. But that policy pursued by some
of those who were in favor of prohibition appeared to him very
strange. Unless we adopt this amendment of the gentleman
from Lee, the whole subject will be left open to the Legislature.

686 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Was the member from Gallatin prepared for that? Mr. H.
opposed at much length the amendment offered by the member
from Greene, and advocated strenuously the adoption of the prin-
ciple requiring a majority of the whole people to approve of a bank
charter before it can go into operation.

Mr. McCALLEN addressed the Convention in opposition to
the whole scheme, but if the same was to be adopted he would
vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Greene.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac said, it was not his intention to detain
the Convention long; he had but a few remarks to make. He was
in favor of the proposition to have the act creating a bank sub-
mitted for the approval of the whole people. Prior to his coming
here, he thought the whole democratic party was in favor of a
total prohibition of banks, that in the party there were none,
whatever, to raise their voice against it. When he reached here
he found that the party was represented differently upon this floor.
He found upon this important question, this question affecting
the whole people, that gentlemen entertained views different from
those he had anticipated.

Previous to the sitting of this Convention the whole demo-
cratic press of the state declared the sentiments of the party to be
in favor of prohibition — the democratic meetings at all times, and
on all occasions, fulminated their thunder against banks in any
and all shapes, the proceedings of their meetings and conventions
breathed the same spirit. The great state convention that met
here, in this very hall, to nominate a candidate for the highest
office in the state, declared they would not support any man for
that office unless he declared his hostility to banks. Such, sir,
had been the sentiments of the democratic party for years upon
this subject. This Convention met, and we find that the friends
of prohibition stand here fifty-eight in number — an almost equal
number of the same party are found in favor of banks. What
was to be done? We have been defeated, must we go over to the
other party, yield up our principles and vote for a banking system?
Is that the only course left for the friends of prohibition? No,
sir. There are those here in favor of prohibition who, when the
democratic party is shipwrecked and about to be engulfed in the
sea of whiggery, come forward and submit an alternate proposition

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 687

to the people, in order that we may present to the people the
question of bank or no bank. In order that the whole people may-
choose in the matter, and decide whether we shall have banks or not.
But, sir, this course has not been followed; gentlemen, with
exceedingly good management, have directed the question of
prohibition differently; they have avoided this alternate plan of
submitting the question. The gentleman from Adams has been
installed as leader by the gentleman from Lee, and the gentleman
from Lee by the member from Adams. They have brought the
question before the Convention in a different shape, and in all
other ways, save that which the friends of the principle could sup-
port. But, sir, their reign has been short. They have been
defeated in their management of the cause, and the gentleman
from Lee presents us now the amendment before us, as a compro-
mise. A compromise with whom? A compromise with the
gentleman from Adams and the gentleman from Sangamon. He
complains that the gentleman from Gallatin alluded to this matter.
Sir, the other day, when he (Mr. Davis) submitted a proposition
of his own origin, in relation to the important question of a free
and independent judiciary, and the gentlemen from Adams and
Sangamon acted with me in its support, it was found very strange — •
by the gentleman from Lee — that I should be found acting with
those gentlemen! Sir, there was no concert, no arrangement, no
compromise there! Yet the gentleman from Lee found it very
strange that the whigs were in favor of that proposition.

Mr. DEMENT rose to explain. He said, that as he had no
chance to reply to the gentleman, he would say to him and his
friend from Gallatin that he had never insinuated there was any
compromise. It was evident that the members from Massac
and Gallatin were one, and that their attack upon him was a
joint one. He interrupted the gentleman now, because he would
have no chance to reply.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, he would defend him.

Mr. DAVIS resumed. Yes, sir, we are one, the gentleman
from Gallatin and myself are acting together upon this question,
as we did upon the question of a judiciary. The gentleman says
he cannot reply, he need not fear, for Hercules, who is sitting behind
me, says he will defend him. The member from Lee says the

688 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

gentleman from Gallatin has taken no part heretofore in the dis-
cussions, this may be very true, sir, but let any one go to the jour-
nals, and they will show that he has acted throughout the whole
session of this Convention, with a strict regard to principle; that
he has never abandoned his principles upon a single question, but
has adhered to them with a pertinacity which Mr. D. was sorry to
say had not been so characteristic of the course of some other
honorable gentlemen. Mr. D. argued till the expiration of his
time, in opposition to the amendment proposed by Mr. Woodson,
and contended that there would never be an expression of the sen-
timents of the people in favor of banks, unless we required a major-
ity of all those voting at the election. This was the only fair,
proper and satisfactory mode of ascertaining the popular will.

Mr. SHERMAN suggested to the member from Greene to
modify his amendment so as to require a special election upon the
subject of approving a bank charter — he would, however, vote for
it as it stood.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery opposed the whole plan before the
Convention.

A motion was made to adjourn, pending which —

Mr. ALLEN (by leave) submitted a report from the committee
on the Bill of Rights, which was laid on the table and 200 copies
ordered to be printed.

And then the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. DEMENT modified his proposition by adding thereto the
following:

"The stockholders in every corporation and joint stock asso-
ciations for banking purposes, issuing bank notes or any kind of
paper credits to circulate as money, shall be individually responsi-
ble to the amount of their respective share or shares of stock in
any such corporation or association, for all its debts and liabilities
of every kind."

Mr. KNOX addressed the Convention in favor of a good
sound specie paying bank, which would facilitate business and lead
to develop the resources of the state, and, also, against prohibi-
tion.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 689

Mr. Thomas and Edwards of Sangamon both opposed the
individual liability clause.

And the question being taken on the amendment of Mr. Wood-
son, by yeas and nays, it resulted — yeas 80, nays 57.

Mr. THOMi^S moved to strike out the individual liability
clause.

Mr. CALDWELL said, that he had been unexpectedly inter-
rupted this morning by the expiration of his time. He felt the
remarks he should make and those he had already made, were due
both to himself and his convictions. He was sorry that his time
was short, for if he had been allowed to continue, the gentleman
from Lee would have seen that there was no ground for his com-
plaint against him (Mr. C.) The gentleman's feelings seem to have
been wounded by what had been said, but if he (Mr. C.) had been
allowed to continue his remarks this morning that gentleman
would have seen that his remarks were not intended to apply
specially or personally to that member.

Mr. DEMENT asked the gentleman if his remark that the
compromise with the gentleman from Adams was suspicious — was
a general remark.

Mr. CALDWELL replied, that it was, but if others applied it
specially to their case, he could not help it.

Mr. DEMENT again rose, but the cries of order prevented his
being heard.

Mr. CALDWELL said, that his time was short and for that
reason he had not interrupted the member from Lee when he spoke
this morning. The gentleman from Lee said that he (Mr. C.) had
not participated in the discussions heretofore in the convention.
This was true, and he felt proud to say that he had not participated
as others had in discussions, the most of which were frivolous
and trifling, and which were continued to purposes and ends to be
accomplished without this house. He was an honest man, and
what he did and said here was for some legitimate project. He
did not arrogate to himself this principle, but such was one reason
why he did not participate in the trifling discussions which we have
had. Again, there were many who had greater celerity in obtain-
ing the floor than others, and that was perhaps a reason why many
had not heretofore spoken. The gentleman regretted that he

690 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

(Mr. C.) had not spoken much in the convention, well, sir, the
very first effort he made — and it was on a most important subject,
the judiciary, the gentleman from Lee rose and attacked him,
attacked him in his position and in his argument. Yes, sir, said
Mr. C, he regrets that I have not spoken, but he forgets that my
very first effort drew upon me an attack from him.

Mr. DEMENT disclaimed, in what he had said on that occa-
sion or reply to Mr. C, any intention to attack him.

Mr. CALDWELL resumed and said, intention or not the
gentleman had attacked him on the very first occasion he had
addressed the convention, and yet he now says he regrets I have
not spoken oftener. Sir, the member from Lee was a leader here
of the democratic party, at the commencement of the session,
and on all party questions, it was unnecessary for him (Mr. C.)
to address the convention, because the leader was always ready to
do so, and had an extraordinary facility in getting the floor,
and none of the humble members of the party were called upon to
speak. The member from Lee complains that my opinions upon
this question have never been heard by him, when, sir, has this
question been before us, in a shape to be properly discussed?
Never, sir, till now. Since it has been, I have endeavored to
obtain the floor; on yesterday I tried several times and failed.
But, sir, when we had a general discussion upon banking, where
was the gentleman from Lee, did he then oppose banking upon
principle ? Did he show how wrong and unjust were its operations,
viewed as a matter of principle? No, sir, he argued it on the
grounds of expediency — he considered the question not one of
principle, but mere expediency. We act differently. We inquire
not into the expediency of any thing which we consider wrong in
principle. We look upon the question of prohibition as a matter
of principle, but the gentleman differs from us. He says we fight
against our friends, that we turn upon our own friends instead of
our enemies. Is this so? We are fighting for prohibition yet, and
cannot compromise the principle. He is acting with those whom
he calls enemies, and is defeating prohibition. We stand firm to
our principle, he has gone over to a bank project, and now at the
last hour, when deserted by our leader, I have come out among
the last of the party to sound the^ tocsin of alarm. Mr. C. said he

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 691

believed that prohibition at this moment stood upon firmer ground
than it had at any moment during the session; and if those who
were in its favor would rally around it, it could be presented in a
shape that could be adopted. Of all the various propositions that
had been presented during the convention on the subject of banks,
this, contained in the amendment of the gentleman from Lee, was
the most objectionable, and the last he could ever vote for. It
was really and truly what it had been termed by the member from
Montgomery — a Wall street proposition drawn up bystock-jobbers
and schemers. It allowed an issue to an amount of three-fourths
its capital, while only one-third of the capital was to be in specie.
This itself was wrong — was a feature he could never adopt. More-
over the charter granted under it was to be a constitutional charter,
which could never be repealed or altered. It was worse than the
ordinary bank charters, for they could be changed, altered or re-
pealed, but a charter granted under this provision would be above
them all. It creates in our state a perpetual banking charter. It
creates a powerful and continual money power, which by its
influence will control all the interests of the state, and possibly
the freedom of our electors. Its effect would be the centralization
of the monied influence of the country, and work injuriously
upon all its interests. It is based upon nothing real or substantial,
its capital is not specie or its equivalent; it is based upon stocks.
Let it once become known in the country that a bank may be
established in Illinois, based upon a capital consisting of stocks,
and, sir, you will have numerous runners and agents from every
stock-jobbers' board in the land — scouring our state, dealing
out money and using every possible means to secure its adoption
by the people. And [is] this to be fastened upon usforever, by a con-
stitutional charter? Mr. C.'s time here expired.

Mr. DEMENT said, he felt himself obliged to trespass upon
the time of the Convention once more, in consequence of what had
been said. The gentleman last up had been either misimpressed in
relation to the position Mr. D. occupied, or desired to misrepresent
him. Mr. D. had not deserted prohibition, he was in favor of it
still, and had, as he had stated in the morning, been its consistent
advocate. He only abandoned total prohibition after a series of
defeats, and then took the next best position — restriction. The

692 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

gentleman from Gallatin has taken a different course. He has
never fought the battle, he has never felt the charge, or returned
the thrust. But after the battle has been fought and we defeated,
after we have been driven from prohibition to the next best posi-
tion, and while we are fighting for that, he comes out of his hiding
place, and rising like a tall and valiant warrior, as he is, and directs
his fire at his friends who are battling for the best they can obtain.
Which course is the true one? The gentleman from Gallatin says,
that on the occasion of his first speech he was attacked. This
was not so; no attack was made upon him. When he said the
supreme court, when it held court where there would be but one
case to be tried, would become contemptible, he, Mr. D., diflPered
from him, and thought otherwise. He thought the gentleman and
the gentleman from Sangamon agreed then in pronouncing the
effort to make the supreme court hold a term in each circuit as
calculated to bring the court into contempt, and he diflPered from
them in opinion. This was all: and no attack was made upon the
gentleman. But it is evident, said Mr. D., from the allusion made
by the gentleman to that matter, that he has been treasuring up,
in his heart, wrath against the day of wrath. He has carried this in
his heart, until that day should arrive when he could get me in
opposition, where he could vent his spleen upon me. It has come,
and we have seen its workings. Not content, sir, with pouring
upon my head the venom he has treasured, you, sir, have come in
for a share. He has complained of you, also, because he says that
from his seat he cannot succeed in catching your eye, and your ear,
and has, therefore, been denied the opportunity of speaking.

Mr. CALDWELL said, he had never complained of the
Speaker.

Mr. DEMENT said, well, sir, he says he could not catch your
eye, nor your ear; if his complaint is not against you, it is against
his seat. The gentleman has said that he thinks prohibition, at
this moment, stands upon firmer and surer grounds than at any
time during the Convention. How he had come to that conclu-
sion is rather difficult for others to perceive. If he thinks falling
from 58 to 50, then to forty odd — decreasing in strength at every
vote, any evidence of our position being improved or better, Mr.
D. could not agree with him. Mr. D. could not believe that pro-

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1847 693

hibition could be carried after its rejection yesterday by an over-
whelming vote; if he thought there was the least chance, he would
vote for it. Mr. D. explained the provisions of his amendment
not to be a banking system, but a plan of restrictions upon any
system that might be adopted. He pointed out the vast difference
between it and the plan of Mr. Sherman, and advocated its
adoption, as the best thing the opponents of banks had any chance
of obtaining.

Mr. THOMAS withdrew his motion to strike out the individual
liability clause.

Mr. CALDWELL said, the gentleman from Lee had repre-
sented him as saying he had offered an alternate prohibition clause.
This was not so, he had not offered any such thing. When he
spoke of this, he was referring to a proposition that had been intro-
duced by the gentleman from Fulton, (Mr. Markley) and by a
member whom he did not now remember.

Mr. ARCHER said he had offered such a proposition.

Mr. CALDWELL said, that it was to the fact that these had
been offered, and he had asked the member from Lee why he
had not taken up one of those, as a compromise, instead of his
present amendment, or the proposition of the gentleman from
Morgan.

Mr. DEMENT had no knowledge of the propositions.

Mr. HAYES offered an amendment.

Mr. CALDWELL offered an alternate prohibition section, to
be submitted to the people separately, which was accepted as a
substitute therefor.

Mr. ADAMS moved the previous question, which was
seconded.

The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, on the amend-
ment offered by Mr. Hayes, as modified; and the same was reject-
ed. Yeas 61, nays 76.

The question was then taken on the amendment first proposed
by Mr. Gregg, accepted by Mr. Dement, and amended by Mr.
Woodson; and the same was adopted. Yeas 127, nays 9.

The question was then taken on the nth section, (individual
liability of stockholders); and the same was adopted. Yeas 109,
nays 30.

694 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The question was taken on the balance of the amendment —
i. e., the first five sections, and they were rejected. Yeas 34, nays

99-

And the report of the committee on Incorporations as amended
and adopted, stood as follows:

Section i. Corporations, not possessing banking powers or
privileges, may be formed under general laws, but shall not be
created by special acts, except for municipal purposes, and in
cases where, in the judgment of the Legislature, the objects of the
corporation cannot be attained under general laws.

Sec. 2. Dues from corporations not possessing banking
powers or privileges shall be secured by such individual liabilities
of the corporators, or other means, as may be prescribed by law.

Sec. 3. No State bank shall hereafter be created, nor shall
the state own, or be liable for, any stock in any corporation or
joint stock association for banking purposes, to be hereafter
created.

Sec. 4. The stockholders in every corporation and joint stock
association for banking pruposes, issuing bank notes or any kind
of paper credits to circulate as money, shall be individually
responsible to the amount of their respective share or shares of
stock in any such corporation or association, for all its debts and
liabilities of every kind.

Sec. 5. No art of the General Assembly authorizing corpora-
tions or associations with banking powers in pursuance of the
foregoing provision, shall go into effect or in any manner be
enforced, unless the same shall be submitted to the people
at the next general election next succeeding the passage of the
same, and be approved by a majority of all votes cast at such
election for or against such law.

Mr. SMITH of Macon moved the Convention adjourn. And
the Convention adjourned.

XLVIII. FRIDAY, AUGUST 6, 1847

The question pending at the adjournment yesterday was on
the adoption of the report as amended.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved the previous question
which was adopted— yeas 65, nays 56.

Mr. SCATES moved a division so as to vote first on the adop-
tion of the last section thereof, and the Convention refused a
division of the question.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the article,
and it was decided in the affirmative — yeas 96, nays 45.

Mr. HAYES offered an additional section.

The PRESIDENT ruled it out of order.

Mr. HAYES appealed from the decision of the Chair and asked
for the reading of his amendment.

Mr. THOMAS objected to its reading.

The question was taken on allowing the amendment to be
read and decided in the affirmative — yeas 65, nays 56.

Mr. CASEY begged the gentleman to withdraw his appeal;
the chair was certainly correct.

Mr. HAYES withdrew his appeal.

Mr. SERVANT moved the article be referred to the committee
on Revision. Carried.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to take up the report of the committee
on the Executive [Legislative?] Department as amended in com-
mittee of the whole; and the motion was agreed to.

The first and second sections and the amendments thereto
were adopted.

The third section was read, and

Mr. MARKLEY moved to strike out "25" and insert "21"
and the same was lost — yeas 41, nays 86.

Mr. SINGLETONofFered an amendment; which was adopted.

And then the section was adopted as amended.

Sec. 3. No person shall be a representative who shall not
have attained the age of twenty-five years; who shall not be a
695

696 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

citizen of the United States, and an inhabitant of this state; who
shall not have resided three years in the state, and within the limits
of the county or district in which he shall be chosen twelve months
next preceding his election, if such county or district shall have
been so long erected; but if not, then within the limits of the county
or counties, district or districts, out of which the same shall have
been taken, unless he shall have been absent on the public business
of the United States, or of this state; and who, moreover, shall
not have paid a state or county tax.

The three following sections were adopted:

Sec. 4. No person shall be a senator who shall not have at-
tained the age of thirty years; who shall not be a citizen of the
United States, and an inhabitant of this state; and who shall not
have resided five years in the state and one year in the county or
district in which he shall be chosen immediately preceding his
election, if such county or district shall have been so long created;
but if not, then within the limits of the county or counties,
district or districts, out of which the same shall have been taken,
unless he shall have been absent on the public business of the United
States, or of this state; and shall not, moreover, have paid a state
or county tax.

Sec. 5. The senators, at their first session herein provided for,
shall be divided by lot from their respective counties or districts,
as near as can be, into two classes. The seats of the first class
shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year, and those
of the second class at the expiration of the fourth year; so that
one-half thereof, as near as possible, may be biennially chosen
forever thereafter.

Sec. 6. The Senate shall consist of twenty-five members, and
the House of Representatives shall consist of seventy-five members,
until the population of the state shall amount to one million of
souls, when five members may be added to the House, and five
additional members for every five hundred thousand inhabitants
thereafter, until the whole number of representatives shall amount
to one hundred; after which, the number shall neither be increased
nor diminished; to be apportioned among the several counties.
In all future apportionments, where more than one county shall
be thrown into a representative district, all the representatives

FRIDAY, AUGUST 6, 1847 697

to which said counties may be entitled, shall be elected by the
entire district; and until there shall be a new apportionment of
senators and representatives, the state shall be divided into
senatorial and representative districts; and the senators and rep-
resentatives shall be apportioned among the several districts as
follows, viz:

The following sections, after various amendments, were
adopted, as follows:

Sec. 7. The first session of the General Assembly shall com-
mence on the first Monday of January, one thousand eight hun-
dred and forty-nine; and forever after, the General Assembly
shall meet on the first Monday in January next ensuing the elec-
tion of the members thereof, and at no other period, unless as
provided by this constitution.

Sec. 8. The Senate and House of Representatives, when
assembled, shall each choose a speaker and other officers. Each
House shall judge of the qualifications and elections of its members,
and sit upon its own adjournments. Two-thirds of each House
shall constitute a quorum; but a smaller number may adjourn
from day to day, and compel the attendance of absent members.

Sec. 9. Each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings,
and publish them. The yeas and nays of the members on any
question shall, at the desire of any two of them, be entered on the
journals.

Sec. 10. Any two members of either House shall have liberty
to dissent and protest against any act or resolution which they
may think injurious to the public or to any individual, and have
the reasons of their dissent entered on the journals.

Sec. II. Each House may determine the rules of its proceed-
ings; punish its members for disorderly behavior; and, with the
concurrence of two-thirds of all the members elected, expel a
member, but not a second time for the same cause; and the reason
for such expulsion shall be entered upon the journal, with the
names of the members voting for the same.

Sec. 12. When vacancies shall happen in either House, the
Governor, or the person exercising the power of Governor, shall
issue writs of election to fill such vacancies.

Sec. 13. Senators and representatives shall, in all cases,

698 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

except treason, felony or breach of the peace, be privileged from
arrest, during the session of the General Assembly, and in going
to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in
either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place.

Sec. 14. Each House may punish, by imprisonment during
its session, any person, not a member, who shall be guilty of
disrespect to the House, by any disorderly or contemptuous
behavior in their presence; provided such imprisonment shall not
at any one time exceed twenty-four hours.

Sec. 15. The doors of each House and of committees of the
whole shall be kept open, except in such cases as, in the opinion
of the House, require secrecy. Neither House shall, without the
consent of the other, adjourn for more than two days, nor to
any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

Sec. 16. Bills may originate in either House, but may be
altered, amended, or rejected by the other; and on the final passage
of all bills, the vote shall be by ayes and noes, and shall be entered
on the journal, and no bill shall become a law without the con-
currence of a majority of all the members elect in each house.

Section 17 as reported was stricken out and the following was
substituted therefor:

"Bills making appropriations for the pay of the members and
officers of the General Assembly, and for the salaries of the officers
of the government as fixed by the constitution, shall not contain
any provisions on any other subject."

Leave of absence was granted to Messrs. Archer, Pinckney,
and Kinney of Bureau, for eight days.

And the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Leave of absence for eight days was granted to Mr. Dummer.

The Convention resumed the consideration of the business
before it in the morning.

Section 18 was read, and after various amendments by Messrs.
Shumway, Peters and others, was adopted as follows:

Sec. 18. Every bill shall be read on three different days in
each house, unless, in case of urgency, three-fourths of the house
where such bill is so depending shall deem it expedient to dispense

FRIDAY, AUGUST 6, 1847 699

with this rule; and every bill, having passed both Houses, shall be
signed by the speakers of their respective Houses; and no private
or local law which may be passed by the Legislature shall embrace
more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title.
And no public act of the General Assembly, shall take effect or be
in force until after the expiration of sixty days from the end of the
session at which the same may be passed, unless, in case of emer-
gency, the Legislature shall otherwise direct.

Messrs. Sim and Kenner offered additional amendments,
which were rejected.

Section nineteen was adopted as follows:

Sec. 19. The style of the laws of this state shall be: — "Be it
enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the
General Assembly."

To section twenty eighteen motions to amend were made,
and the yeas and nays were taken seven times; and the section
was adopted as reported — yeas 93, nays 35.

Mr. VANCE moved to insert the following, as an additional
section:

"After the year i860, the Legislature may raise the per diem
pay of members to any sum not over $2 per day;" and the same
was rejected.

The twenty-first section was adopted, as follows:

Sec. 11. The per diem and mileage allowed to each member
of the Legislature shall be certified by the speakers of their respec-
tive houses, and entered on the journals and published at the close
of the session.

The twenty-second section was adopted, as follows:

Sec. 11. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in
consequence of appropriations made by law; and an accurate
statement of the receipts and expenditures of the public money
shall be attached to, and published with the laws at the rising
of each session of the General Assembly. And no person, who
has been or may be a collector or holder of public moneys shall
be eligible to a seat in either house of the General Assembly, nor
be elected to any office of profit or trust in this state, until such
person shall have accounted for, and paid into the treasury, all
sums, for which he may be accountable.

700 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sec. 23. No senator or representative shall, during the time
for which he shall have been elected, or during one year after the
expiration thereof, be appointed or elected to any civil office, or
place of trust, under this state, which shall have been created, or the
emoluments of which shall have been increased, during such time.

Mr. AKIN moved to add to it: "Nor shall any member of
this Convention be eligible to any office created by this constitu-
tion at the first election after its ratification."

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon oflFered the following, as a
substitute thereof:

"No person elected to the Legislature shall receive any civil
appointment within this state, or to the Senate of the United
States, from the Governor, the Governor and Senate, or from the
Legislature, during the term for which he shall have been elected;
and all such appointments and all votes given for any such mem-
ber, for any such office or appointments shall be void."

Mr. EDWARDS supported the amendment with some re-
marks, and was replied to by

Mr. SCATES who doubted its constitutionality.

The Convention, without taking the question, adjourned till
to-morrow at 8 o'clock.

XLIX. SATURDAY, AUGUST 7, 1847

Mr. WEST moved to suspend the rules to enable him to offer
the following preamble and resolutions. And the rules were
unanimously suspended.

Whereas, we have just learned with deep and poigijant regret
of the death of Captain Franklin Niles, of the 5th
regiment of Illinois volunteers, which occurred on the
24th day of July last, whilst on his way to Mexico, in
command of a company of volunteers from Madison
county; therefore.

Resolved, That we sincerely mourn and deeply regret the death
of our fellow-citizen, Capt. Franklin Niles, of the 5th regiment
Illinois volunteers.

Resolved, That in the death of Capt. Niles, the volunteer army
of the United States has sustained the loss of a brave and accom-
plished officer; our state one of its noblest and deserving sons;
and the community one of its brightest ornaments, and his family
and friends one who was endeared to them by every feeling and
sentiment of love and esteem.

Resolved, That we cordially sympathize with the 5th regiment
of Illinois volunteers, and the company under his command, and
with the friends and family of the deceased, who, by this afflicting
dispensation of Almighty God, have sustained a loss which neither
the honors of the world, or the sympathies of friends, can deprive
of its bitterness.

Resolved, That the Secretary furnish a copy of the above
resolutions to the 5th regiment Illinois volunteers, and the family
of the deceased.

Mr. WEST accompanied the presentation of the above with
some exceedingly chaste and appropriate remarks, in relation to
the virtue and manly patriotism of the deceased.^"

And the preamble and resolutions were unanimously adopted.

=■'■' This eulogy by West may be found in the Sangamo Journal, August 12 .
701

702 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The question pending was on the adoption of the substitute
proposed by Mr. Edwards of Satigamon for the amendment of
Mr. Akin to the twenty-third section of the report of the Legisla-
tive committee.

Messrs. Edwards of Sangamon, Harvey, Williams, White-
side, HuRLBUT and Peters advocated the adoption of the sub-
stitute, and Messrs Farwell and Pratt opposed it.

The question was taken thereon and it was adopted — yeas 90,
nays 29.

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to add to the section the following:

"Nor shall any member of the General Assembly be interested,
either directly or indirectly, in any contract with the state, or any
county thereof, authorized by any law passed during the time for
which he shall have been elected, or during one year after the
expiration thereof."

Mr. AKIN offered the amendment presented, yesterday, as a
substitute therefor.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to lay the substitute on the table.

The yeas and nays were ordered thereon, and the substitute
was laid on the table — yeas 81, nays 41.

The question recurred on the amendment of Mr. Lockwood,
and it was adopted.

Mr. PRATT moved to add to the section: "All persons
elected by the people of this state to any office whatever, shall,
if the same be accepted, be ineligible to any other office in the
state during the period for which they shall have been elected."

Mr. FARWELL advocated the adoption of the amendment,
as carrying out the principles contained in the amendment of Mr.
Edwards, adopted this morning.

Mr. KNOWLTON moved to lay the amendment on the table.

And the section was then adopted.

Sec. 24. The House of Representatives shall have the sole
power of impeaching; but a majority of all the members elected
must concur in an impeachment. All impeachments shall be tried
by the Senate; and when sitting for that purpose, the senators
shall be upon oath, or affirmation, to do justice according to law
and evidence. No person shall be convicted without the concur-
rence of two-thirds of all the senators elected.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 7, 1847 703

Mr. CALDWELL moved to add to the section the following:
"the General Assembly shall be forever prohibited from passing
any private, special or general acts, renewing, extending or
in any wise creating or authorizing the exercise of banking powers
and privileges: "Provided, that the foregoing section shall be
submitted as a separate question to the people, and if the same
be adopted by a majority of the votes cast for and against the
constitution, then the same shall become a part of this constitu-
tion, and supersede all other provisions to the contrary.

Mr. SMITH of Macon moved to lay the same on the table.

Mr. CALDWELL demanded the yeas and nays, and they
were ordered.

Mr. CALDWELL moved a call of the Convention; which was
ordered and made.

The question was taken by yeas and nays, and decided in the
negative — yeas 65, nays 66.

Mr. GEDDES moved to add to the amendment, before the
proviso: "The Legislature shall pass laws imposing adequate
penalties on the circulation of the paper of banks located out of
this state, and making void all contracts, the consideration
of which is the paper of such banks, and all payments made in
the notes of such bank."

Mr. SCATES thought the amendment of the gentleman from
Hancock (Mr. Geddes) just and correct in principle, but under
the circumstances he would vote against it. A few days ago the
question of prohibition was before the Convention, but their new
leader brought in this feature, as an amendment to it. He and
others had been caught by it, and voted for it, and then prohibi-
tion was defeated. He hoped the friends of prohibition would
vote down this measure, and have a full and direct vote upon the
question of prohibition, upon its real merits.

Mr. CALDWELL said, he, too, had voted for the amendment
now proposed when offered a day or two ago by the gentleman
from Adams, but now he would vote against it. It contained
principles that he thought just in themselves, but there were
many friends of prohibition who could not vote for it with this
amendment hanging upon it. He had voted for it in good faith

704

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

then, but now would oppose it, as there was a sentiment in the
Convention against it.

Mr. TURNBULL was opposed to prohibition, but this amend-
ment was a proper accompaniment to that principle; therefore,
he would vote for it, and then vote against the whole.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to lay the whole subject
on the table.

The PRESIDENT said the motion was out of order. The
Convention had just refused to lay the proposition on the table;
a motion to lay the amendment to the amendment on the
table, would be in order.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said, the friends of prohibition
were desirous to present to the people the naked question of bank
or no bank, and he hoped it would be allowed to be done. The
bank party had expressed their willingness to do this; but they
desire now to clog the proposition with this amendment. Where
are all their professions in favor of submitting the question to the
people? Did they ever feel willing to do so? If so, let them come
forward now, and show the sincerity of their professions, and vote
for submitting this question unencumbered with other propo-
sitions. Let them present us with the naked question of bank
or no bank.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to refer the whole subject
to the committee on Incorporations.

Mr. ADAMS advocated the reference of the subject to the
committee, and then branching out into the merits of the amend-
ment, was called to order.

Mr. KINNEY of St. Clair moved the previous question.

Mr. DEMENT opposed the previous question. He wanted a
test vote upon the subject. He would vote against the amend-
ment.

Mr. CHURCH pointed out that, in its present shape, the
section providing for the trial of impeachments must be submitted
with the prohibitory clause.

The question being taken, the previous question was not
ordered — yeas ^t,^ nays 65.

The question then recurred on referring the subject to the
committee.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 7, 1847 705

Mr. WOODSON hoped the reference would be made. By-
referring it we could economize time.

[Mr. WOODSON remarked/' that the question was now upon
the reference of this proposition to the committee on incorpora-
tions. The gentleman from Macoupin was, perhaps, not aware
that the question had been settled, that any act which might be
passed by the legislature, should be referred to the people for
sanction or rejection; and, such being the case, he had supposed
that the gentleman would have been content to let it remain as it
was. If the question of prohibition was still pending, he would
have no objection that it should be referred; but inasmuch as
so much time had been consumed upon it, and a decision had been
arrived at by the convention, he thought it could serve no good
purpose to continue to agitate the question. If there had been
an expression of the sense of the convention in regard to the sub-
ject at all, it was unmistakably in favor of the proposition which
had already been adopted, to the exclusion of all others. He was
a restrictionist, though not a prohibitionist, and as restriction —

Mr. Woodson was reminded by the President that it was not
in order to debate the merits of the proposition, pending a question
of reference.

Mr. WOODSON said he was speaking to the question of
reference; he was remarking that restriction had been adopted,
and in the most proper and respectful mode in which it could be
adopted. When an act was passed by the legislature, it was to
be submitted to the people for sanction or rejection by them;
could there be a more respectful course than this taken by the con-
vention ? It was more respectful towards the people than it would
be to refer to them the question of prohibition or no prohibition;
and in case the people should be against prohibition, then to leave
it open to the legislature —

[Mr. Woodson was again called to order.]

Why should this proposition be referred at this late stage of
the proceeding? It could answer no good purpose; it could only
serve to consume the time of the convention, which they ought
by every practicable means to economize.]

"This speech by Woodson is taken from the Sangamo Journal, August 24,

7o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. FARWELL believed the matter ought not to be referred
to the committee, because those who are in favor of submitting the
question to the people can expect nothing from that committee,
who have determined that the people shall have nothing to say on
the subject. If referred to them, it will never be heard of again.
Here, Mr. F. was called to order by the President.

Mr. F. proceeded again for a few minutes, and was called to
order for irrelevancy.

Mr. F. commenced four additional times to proceed, but, after
a few words each time, was called to order on the same ground.

Mr. F., still standing, was about to proceed the seventh time,
when

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon insisted that a member when
called to order should take his seat.

Mr. F. said he would sit down.

The PRESIDENT said, the gentleman had been out of order;
that nothing could be discussed but the question of reference, and
that only.

Mr. FARWELL was about to proceed, when

Mr. KENNER raised a point of order, that the gentleman
had spoken before — that is, had taken his seat.

The PRESIDENT overruled the point of order.

Mr. FARWELL again proceeded, for about one minute, in
opposition to the reference, because the amendment was only in-
tended to break down the question of prohibition. Cries of
"order" from all parts of the hall.

Mr. GREGG moved that the Convention adjourn till Monday,
to enable the districting committee of twenty-seven to close their
labors. And the motion was agreed to.

L. MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 1847

The President being absent, Mr. Z. Casey took the chair.

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Palmer of Marshall.

The question pending at the adjournment on Saturday, was
on the motion to refer the amendment of Mr. CALDWELL,
together with the amendment thereto, to the committee on Incor-
porations.

Mr. ECCLES moved a call of the convention, and the same
was ordered.

After the list had been gone through with, and no quorum
appeared, the doors were closed.

Mr. ROMAN moved that leave of absence be given to Mr.
Kinney of St. Clair, tor eight days, and leave of absence for eight
days was granted to Messrs. Woodson, Choate, Evey, Jeniuns
and J. M. Davis.

Messrs. Dale, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Green of Tazewell,
and Singleton were excused on account of sickness. The follow-
ing gentlemen absent were not excused: Ballingall, Bond,
Constable, Edwards of Madison, Logan, Northcott, Peters
and the President.

A quorum having appeared, the convention resumed its busi-
ness.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon urged the reference to the com-
mittee on Incorporations.

Mr. CALDWELL opposed the reference to the committee on
Incorporations; he preferred a direct vote upon the question.

Mr. CONSTABLE was in favor of the proposition offered by
the member from Gallatin, but he thought it out of place in the
section to which it was proposed to attach it. He suggested its
reference to a select committee of its friends. Indeed, it was an
established rule, that a proposition should not be referred to a
committee known to be opposed to it.

Mr. SCATES raised a point of order, whether the motion to
refer an amendment did not carry with it the whole subject.
707

7o8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The CHAIR said such was his opinion and he would so decide,
were it not the president had uniformly decided otherwise, and he
would follow his decision.

Mr. CALDWELL moved that the amendment and the amend-
ment thereto, be referred to a select committee.

Mr. SCATES appealed from the decision of the chair.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean raised a point of order, whether the
amendment was in order at the time it was offered on Saturday.

The CHAIR decided that he knew nothing of that matter.
It had been received by the president, and had been decided by
him to be in order. Therefore, the present occupant of the chair
would decide the amendment to have been in order.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean appealed from the decision of the chair.

Mr. SCATES withdrew his appeal, and Mr. Davis did the
same.

The question recurring on the motion to refer,

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin asked a division of the question
so as to first vote on referring the amendment of Mr. Geddes.
Objected to; and the vote being taken the convention refused to
divide the question.

Mr. SINGLETON opposed the motion to refer the question to
the committee. This question had been discussed; we were all
fully prepared to vote upon it, and he hoped it would be settled at
once. He desired a direct vote, and did not approve of the move-
ments to evade it.

The question was taken on referring the subject to the com-
mittee on Incorporations, by yeas and nays, and decided in the
negative — yeas G^, nays 77.

The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, on referring
the amendments to a select committee of nine, and decided in the
affirmative — yeas 71, nays 67.

The section then stood as reported.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to add to it an amendment, providing
a power to repeal all charters, &c.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon raised a point of order, "was
the amendment relevant to the section."

The CHAIR decided its irrelevancy was a question for the

MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 1847 709

convention, good ground for the body to reject it, but not a ques-
tion for him to decide.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean appealed.

After a short debate the amendment was withdrawn.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to reconsider the vote
referring the subject to a select committee.

Mr. DEMENT advocated the reconsideration; the present
was as good as any other time to decide the question. He hoped
the convention would take a direct vote on the subject.

Mr. CONSTABLE said the friends of prohibition seem desir-
ous to force this question upon us at this moment, and he would
vote for the reconsideration. He was in favor of the proposition
and had voted for its reference as the best mode of advancing it.
But as some were not disposed to be satisfied with well enough,
he would vote to reconsider and then vote against the whole.

Mr. CALDWELL hoped the vote to reconsider would not
prevail. There were many who were not satisfied with its present
phraseology, and in committee this difficulty might be obviated.

Mr. PALMER opposed the reconsideration on the same
grounds.

Mr. SHERMAN hoped it would be reconsidered, and the
question met fairly now.

The question on reconsideration was taken and decided in the
affirmative — yeas 69, nays 56.

Mr. CALDWELL withdrew his original proposition and offered
the following:

Sec. — . The general assembly shall be forever prohibited
from passing any private, special, or general law, renewing, ex-
tending or in anywise creating or authorizing the exercise of bank-
ing powers or privileges within this state. Provided, that this
clause be submitted as a separate section to the people at the
election held for the adoption of this constitution; and if such
clause as a separate section be adopted by a majority of the votes
cast for and against it, then the same shall become a part of this
constitution, and supersede all provisions in this constitution
to the contrary, otherwise to be void.

Mr. CALDWELL moved the previous question.

7IO ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Messrs. WILLIAMS and DEMENT opposed the previous
question.

Mr. CALDWELL advocated it.

Mr. McCALLEN opposed it.

And the convention refused to order the main question— yeas
65, nays 74.

Mr. GEDDES renewed his amendment.

Mr. ADAMS moved the previous question; which was ordered;
when,

Mr. CALDWELL withdrew his amendment.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the 23d sec-
tion, and it was adopted.

Mr. WILLIAMS offered an amendment, containing the sub-
stance of Mr. Caldwell's and Mr. Geddes' amendments em-
bodied in one.

Mr. HAYES offered the following as a substitute therefor:

"The question of banking shall be submitted to the people,
when they shall vote on the adoption of this constitution, and if a
majority of those voting on the question shall vote for banking,
then the general assembly may pass banking laws under the
restrictions contained in this constitution, but if the majority
voting on the question, shall not vote for banking, then no person,
corporation or association of persons shall be allowed to manu-
facture or emit any paper intended to circulate as paper money."

And the vote being taken thereon, by yeas and nays,, it was
rejected — yeas 60, nays 80.

A motion was made to adjourn, and it was rejected.

Mr. CALDWELL moved as a substitute for the amendment
of Mr. Williams, his own proposition (before withdrawn) and the
amendment thereto, offered by Mr.GEDDES, with a proviso to
the latter, that it should be submitted as a section separate
from the constitution, and from his prohibitory section.

Mr. SHIELDS moved the Convention adjourn till 3 p. m.
Lost.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the previous question; which was
ordered.

And the question recurring on the substitute it was rejected —
yeas (,(>, nays 85.

MONDJY, AUGUST 9, 1847 7 1 1

The question recurring on the amendment of Mr. Williams,

Mr. CALDWELL called for a division of the question, so as
to vote first on the prohibitory part. And the Convention
refused to divide the question.

The amendment was then rejected— yeas 68, nays 72.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

[Mr. CALDWELL alluded^^ to the various objections which
had been urged against this amendment, and against the pro-
priety of referring it to the committee; first, that it occupied the
wrong place; next, that it had no application to the subject which
it proposed to amend, and that it ought therefore to be discon-
nected with it. Now, said Mr. Caldwell, what is the subject
under investigation at this time as embodied in this report? Why,
it is but one single subject, and that is the subject of legislative
power; that is the subject embraced in this section. It is a limit-
ation on legislative power, in a particular mode; conferring power
upon the legislature under certain limitations. I am not so
familiar with the forms of legislation as the gentleman from San-
gamon, but I am satisfied that it is in the right place; however, as
to the place it shall occupy, I am not at all tenacious. Now,
suppose the section should be adopted, why it will all be referred
to the committee on revision, and they can deta'ch it if they please
from the body of this article and give it the form of a distinct
article. The very object of the constitution of that committee
is for the purpose of revising and arranging the sections. The
proposition is of itself separate and distinct. But the gentleman
says, it is not in order to submit an additional section. I do not
know how that is, but I think it is proper to submit a distinct
proposition; so far as that objection is concerned, it amounts to
nothing at all. The committee on revision can set it right; and
in addition to that, we hold a similar proposition before the com-
mittee on the legislative department; they did not think proper
to act on it, and if it be now referred to the committee, I shall
consider it a defeat of the proposition. This, I take it, will be the
effect of reference. It is well known what the sentiments of that
committee are. It will never be reported back.

'^This fuller account of the remarks by Caldwell, Constable, Pratt,
Singleton, and others is taken from the Sangamo Journal, August 24.

712 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. CONSTABLE said, although perfectly willing to vote for
a proposition of this kind separately and distinctly, and although
in so voting, he should vote the sentiments which he sincerely
entertained; yet, he could not consent to place this subject in
connection with the subject contained in the legislative report as
it now stood. It was a subject which would have to be explained;
it was a subject which would not be understood by the casual
observer. Had the gentleman from Gallatin presented, in a sep-
arate report, the reasons for the introduction of this section, or
had he introduced it as a distinct section of this report, there might
have been some propriety in thus submitting it; and in the re-
marks which he had made concerning the propriety of providing
for the impeachment of derelict officers, but he could not exactly
see the propriety of introducing it in this place. But in voting
for the reference, he did not do so for the purpose of defeating the
proposition, although the gentleman might suppose that that was
the design of those who voted for its reference. The gentleman
might select some other committee if he pleased. He was in favor
of the reference for the purpose of having the subject presented in
a proper shape and in a proper place, in order that the sense of
the convention might be taken upon it, in such a manner as not
to involve it in any doubt. He thought that it was proper to
refer the proposition, unless the gentleman would consent to with-
draw it, and submit it at some other time. He would add, that
he did not think that the committee on Incorporations was the
committee to which it should be sent, as that committee had
already considered the subject, and reported unfavorably upon it;
and he believed it was a parliamentary rule, that a measure was
entitled to a reference to its friends.

Mr. SINGLETON said, he should vote against referring
the proposition to the committee, not because he was in favor of the
proposition, but because he was anxious to dispose of it. If it
were referred to the committee, it would be their duty to make a
report. He was opposed to this method of evading the question.
He desired to see it fairly met and disposed of.

The question was taken on referring the subject to the com-
mittee on Incorporations, by yeas and nays, and decided in the
negative — yeas 63, nays 77.

MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 1847 713

The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, on referring
amendments to a select committee of nine, and decided in the
affirmative — yeas 71, nays 67.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, that as a friend of the proposition
which had been adopted, he would vote for the reconsideration;
and then, against every proposition to amend it. Mr. Caldwell
was opposed to the reconsideration of this vote. The proposition
had been offered by him in a spirit of compromise, with a view of
placing it in such form and place as would render it free from
objection.

Mr. SHERMAN was in favor of reconsideration. He was
anxious to have a direct vote upon the proposition, so that the
question might be definitely settled.

The question being taken on motion to reconsider the vote, it
was, upon a division, decided in the affirmative.

Mr. GEDDES moved to amend the amendment by inserting
the following immediately after the proviso:

"The legislature shall pass laws imposing adequate penalties
on the circulation of paper of banks, located out of the State; and
making void all contracts, the consideration of which is the paper
of such banks, and all payments made in the notes of such banks."

Mr. CONSTABLE observed that from the situation in which
the matter now stood, the Convention would perceive that the
submission was not a submission of the simple question of banking,
but also of the mode of impeachment. The people would not have
an opportunity of voting upon the question of banking as a distinct
question; they would have to vote also on the question as to the
manner in which impeachments shall be conducted. If one of
these questions should be rejected, the other must be rejected also.

Mr. PRATT asked for the reading of the amendments, to-
gether with the original proposition. [They were read.] He
would prefer having these propositions, he said, separate and dis-
tinct; it seemed, however, not to have been their fortune to have
them so presented. The gentleman from Wabash, though in
favor of the proposition of the gentleman from Gallatin, yet he
would not sustain the proposition in the connection in which it
stood. The proposition contemplated submitting the clause and
not the section.

714

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The proposition, at the suggestion of Mr. Constable, was
again read; and it was modified by the mover.

It seems to me, said Mr. Pratt, that by the proposition as now
modified, the objections of the gentleman from Wabash will be
obviated. I do not propose to detain the convention with any
discussion in relation to the subject of banking. I only desire to
say this; — when the resolution was offered by me in the early
stage of the proceedings conterhplating prohibition, a great many
gentlemen who professed to be against banks, were unwilling to
have prohibition placed in the constitution for the reason as they
then assigned that it would endanger the constitution itself;
though they were entirely willing to support a proposition to be
submitted as a separate section and thus permit the popular voice
to be expressed upon the subject, and believing as they did, that
we were not sufficiently instructed on the subject previous to
coming here. I thought, sir, there was plausibility in this, but it
seems the gentlemen were not sincere in making the proposition;
it seems that there was some hidden reason for taking this course.
The question is now presented in such a shape. Gentlemen still
dodge the question. I here undertake to say that I believe, and
I have no doubt the friends of prohibition will concur in that be-
lief, that a large share of those who voted with us were unwilling
to appeal to the popular judgment; they were fearful that if the
question were to go before the people, they might speak in tones of
rebuke, condemning their action. If I am not mistaken in this,
gentlemen will come out, and show by their votes that their pro-
fessions at that time were sincere. As to the motion of the gentle-
man from Hancock, I regret that it has been thrown in for the
purpose of embarrassing the main proposition; but I will go for
the amendment, for I am one of those who wish to see in this
State a constitutional currency — a currency which will conform
to the currency of the world, gold and silver. I would like to see
the proposition of the gentleman from Hancock left to legislative
action hereafter; yet I shall go for the amendment for the purpose
of testing the votes of those who throw in the proposition for the
purpose of embarrassing the action of the Convention, and let them
show what they will do with the bantling, as they have shaped it;

MONDAY, AUGUST g, 1847 i\S

and I will undertake to say that they will vote for the proposition
as amended.

One thing more, sir. It looked rather strange this morning
when we had come to the conclusion that it should go to a commit-
tee of nine, who should be required to determine the naked ques-
tions thus presented; and when gentlemen succeeded in the motion
for reconsideration, professing by their votes that they wished
the previous question to be put to the convention, that they
should then wheel right about in five minutes, and vote against
the previous question. Does not this look like insincerity? Does
it not look as if they are unwilling to vote on the question nakedly
and separately? When the question of prohibition was before
us, they voted against prohibition. They were then willing to
make it an alternative proposition, — to submit the alternative
proposition of restricted banking or prohibition to the people and
let them decide between the two. From this position they seem
to have retreated. They seem now to be unwilling to leave the
matter to be decided by the popular voice. They seem to have
gathered strength, and to have determined that the people shall
have nothing to do with it whatever.

I believe it will be conceded on all hands, that the bane of this
country has been in an agitated condition of its pecuniary affairs,
an unsettled state of the currency. Within the last five years,
however, since this matter has been somewhat quieted, we have
begun to prosper — prosperity has begun to exhibit itself — and yet
gentlemen by their actions seem willing to protract their agitation
of this question. They are unwilling to adopt a permanent and
settled system, and they are unwilling to trust the people on this
question of currency — and they are indisposed, as they say, to tie
up the hands of the legislature, because a banking system in
some form may become indispensable. Is there any thing con-
sistent in this ? There is not the same hesitancy to trust the people
on other important subjects.

Mr. SINGLETON said he felt somewhat awkwardly situated
in regard to this question. He was not exactly in favor of either
proposition. He was opposed to the one that had been adopted
by the convention, and he would briefly state the reasons why he
disliked it, and why he had voted against it.

7i6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

We are sent here, continued Mr. S., to form a new organic law,
and we very gravely proceed to form three distinct departments
of the government, and to assign to each department its appro-
priate duties, and to confer upon each the powers necessarily
belonging to it. We have created a legislative department — the
law-making power. Here is a proposition for banking proceeding
from the law making power to the people. I think, sir, it is a
novel mode of adopting laws; I think it is a departure from the
true principles of good government to submit questions of this
kind, or any other, from the law-making power to the people.
The people have determined to confide the law-making power to
the appropriate department of the government, and when that
department undertakes to exercise the power, they ought to exer-
cise it independently and definitely. This is my opinion, and it
is based upon principle, and not because I do not think the people
capable of deciding all questions.

I am in favor of banks. I voted against the proposition which
was adopted by this convention, and I am now in favor of the
amendment which is pending. I am in favor of it, because, if a
proposition like that on the table, is to go to the people, I want
it as perfect as possible, — not as the gentleman from Jo Daviess
has said, that it shall be a naked question. What does he mean?
Does he mean to divest the question of its alternative form, and
thus make it naked? Does he mean that it shall be directed ex-
clusively to one single point - — the question of carrying on banking
in this State, without embracing the question of the circulation
of bank paper? It is admitted that the evils of which we have to
complain of, arise from the circulation of bank paper. If then
the gentleman desires to divest the question of its evils, it is not
the question of banking alone which he should desire to submit;
but he says that he wants a constitutional currency. Have we
not bank paper in the State now? Suppose we prohibit the
creation of banks, does the gentleman accomplish his object? I
want to see the question fairly presented, that all the evils may be
obviated. Let us make a fair test of the principles of those who
are opposed to banking. If they say that the circulation of bank
paper in the State is an evil, then I submit, though I do not agree
with them that it is.

MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 1847 717

I shall vote for this amendment; but I am not prepared to say
that I shall vote for the proposition if amended, because the
question would not then go before the people in the shape in which
it would be most conformable to my notions. I hope that all
those who are opposed to banks, will also oppose the circulation
of bank paper. I hope that the friends of prohibition will make
this issue, and if we can get that out of the way, then I will go for
this proposition when offered; I am unwilling that the two should
be adopted, but I am willing to go for this if the other can be got
out of the way; and I am willing to do this for the purpose of
making a fair issue before the people. Now, I ask the gentleman
from Jo Daviess, who seemed unwilling to let the convention
know exactly what his opinion was — I ask him if it is right to
submit to the people the question of the creation of banks alone,
without touching the question of the circulation of bank paper?
It must be admitted that there are some good effects attending
banking, and if there are evils also, we have to suffer the evils
without enjoying the benefit. If we prohibit banking in this
State, without doing more than this, does it not seem to favor the
proposition that we will use the paper of banks of other States,
and exclude our own citizens from the advantages to be derived
from banking? It appears to me so.

I am willing, sir, to go for anything that will present the
question to the people in the proper shape, and when it is adopted,
and we get rid of the provision already adopted, then I am pre-
pared to vote for the amendment as amended. I do not see the
objection to it that the gentleman from Knox does. If adopted it
will stand as a separate section, and be submitted to the people
as a separate and distinct section, and it appears to me that there
is nothing improper in so submitting it. The whole constitution
is to be referred to the people, and we only propose that this shall
be referred as a separate section and there is a great difference in
my judgment between referring the question as just proposed, and
referring a law from the law-making power, to the people. The
principle, it appears to me, is essentially wrong, and it is this which
makes me opposed to the provision which has been adopted.

Mr. WILLIAMS hoped the amendment would be adopted.
He concurred with the gentleman from Jo Daviess, in the most

7i8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of what he had said on the subject, except the suspicion which he
had intimated, in his opinion very gratuitously, against the sin-
cerity of members of the convention. He was not one of those
persons, however, who were embraced in the insinuation which
the gentleman had thrown out, for he had voted with the pro-
hibitionists in almost every particular. He thought the insinua-
tions of the gentleman entirely uncalled for.

The gentleman from Jefferson had said on a former occasion,
that he had been cheated once and did not intend to be again.
He could only say that the gentleman could not have been cheated
as to the purpose for which the amendment was intended, for it
had been frankly stated at every stage of its progress.

If there must be a paper circulation in this State, for it was
that and that alone which was complained of as being objection
able, there ought to be a decided preference given to our own
paper. Now gentlemen who were in favor of prohibition, were in
favor of it for other reasons than those which influenced him. He
did not believe that the evils connected with the circulation of
paper money were greater, or as great, as the benefits to be derived
from it. He did not think that a paper circulation would be
dispensed with; he wished to have the proposition adopted, how-
ever, in order that they might have an actual experiment, and
ascertain by experience whether the entire suppression of the
circulation of bank paper would be wise or unwise. He believed
that a hard money currency, if the principle should be fully carried
out, would result in the destruction of the commercial interests of
the State. He hoped that those who agreed with him in regard
to the propriety of having banks, would permit the question to
be submitted to the people and decided by them.

Mr. SCATES explained the position he occupied in regard to
this amendment.

Mr. SERVANT asked the indulgence of the convention for
less than three minutes of their time, he said, to enable him to
define his position. It is well known to you, sir, (continued Mr.
S.), and to every gentleman in the convention, that I was opposed
to the proposition as originally submitted, but believing that
neither of the extremes should be adopted, and the prohibition
should not be adopted, and wishing that the matter should be

MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 184.7 7i9

brought to a close, I voted in good faith for the proposition of the
gentleman from Wabash, and against the amendment. I voted
against it then, and shall now, and shall vote against every prop-
osition that is in the least degree calculated to disturb the com-
promise that was agreed upon some days ago. Though I was
originally opposed to a compromise, yet believing that the session
might be almost indefinitely protracted, without coming to any
conclusion on the subject, without a compromise, and believing
that a compromise was intended in good faith, I voted for it, and
shall vote against every proposition that is calculated to disturb
that compromise.]

AFTERNOON

Mr. MARKLEY moved a call of the Convention, which was
made, a quorum appearing,

Mr. MARKLEY moved to reconsider the vote whereby Mr.
Williams' amendment was rejected.

And the question being taken by yeas and nays, the Conven-
tion refused to reconsider — yeas 55, nays 71.

So the bank question was settled for the present, and stands
as it did on Friday morning last.

Sections 25, 26 and 27 were read and adopted, as follows:

Sec. 25. The Governor and all other civil officers under this
state shall be liable to impeachment for any misdemeanor in
office; but judgment in such cases shall not extend further than
to removal from office, and disqualification to hold any office of
honor, profit, or trust, under this state. The party, whether
convicted or acquitted, shall nevertheless be liable to indictment,
trial, judgment, and punishment according to law.

Sec. 26. No judge of any court of law or equity. Secretary
of State, Attorney General, Attorney for the State, recorder,
clerk of any court of record, sheriff or collector, member of either
house of Congress, or person holding any lucrative office under
the United States or this state, — provided that appointments in
the militia, justices of the peace, shall not be considered lucrative
offices, — shall have a seat in the General Assembly; nor shall any
person, holding any office of honor or profit under the government

720 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of the United States, hold any office under the authority of this
state.

Sec. 27. Every person who shall be chosen or appointed to
any office of trust or profit shall, before entering upon the duties
thereof, take an oath to support the constitution of the United
States and of this state, and also an oath of office.

Section 28 was read, as follows:

Sec. 28. The General Assembly shall have full power to
exclude from the privilege of electing or being elected any person
convicted of bribery, perjury, or any other infamous crime.

Mr. SCATES offered a long series of amendments to be added
to the section, defining the powers of the Legislature and enumer-
ating the same.

To which were offered various amendments by Messrs. Geddes,
McCallen, Hay, Kenner, Harvey and Armstrong.

Mr. MOFFETT moved the previous question; which was
ordered, and the amendments were rejected — yeas 31, nays 103.

And then, the section was adopted.

Section 29 was read and adopted.

Sec. 29. The General Assembly shall have no power to grant
divorces, but may authorize the courts of justice to grant them for
such causes as may be specified by law: Provided, That such laws
be general and uniform in their operation throughout the state.

Section 30 was then taken up.

Sec. 30. The Legislature shall never grant or authorize
extra compensation to any public officer, agent, servant or
contractor, after the service shall have been rendered or the con-
tract entered into.

Mr. GRAIN moved to add thereto, "But may at any time
repeal, alter or amend, when in their opinion the public good
requires it, any charter, or general law, granting exclusive privi-
leges to any incorporation, individual or individuals whatever."

And the same by yeas and nays was rejected — yeas 48, nays 84.

And the section was adopted.

Section 31, after an amendment, was adopted, as follows:

Sec. 31. The General Assembly shall direct by law in what
manner suits may be brought against the state.

Section*32 was taken up.

MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 1847 721

Sec. 32. The General Assembly shall have no power to
authorize lotteries for any purpose, and shall pass laws to prohibit
the sale of lottery tickets in this state.

Mr. DEMENT moved to insert after "purpose" in first line
"nor to revive or extend the charter of the state bank or the
charter of any other bank heretofore existing in the state. "

And the same was adopted.

The section was then adopted.

Section 2)2, was read and adopted.

Sec. 2,Z- The General Assembly shall have no power to
authorize, by private or special law, the sale of any lands or other
real estate belonging in whole or in part to any individual or in-
dividuals.

The 34th section was taken up, but before any vote thereon,

Mr. moved the Convention adjourn.

Mr. CONSTABLE, by leave, introduced a resolution grant-
ing the use of this Hall for an introductory lecture, and the Senate
chamber for a course of lectures on mesmerism. Adopted.

And the Convention adjourned till to-morrow at 8 o'clock.

LI. TUESDAY, AUGUST lo, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Palmer of Macoupin [Marshall?].

Mr. ROBBINS presented a petition from sundry citizens of
Randolph county, praying a constitutional provision, for the
exemption of a freehold from execution.

He moved its reference to a select committee — to be com-
posed of the committees on Law Reform and Miscellaneous Sub-
jects, with the following instructions:

"That they report an article providing that, from and after
the first day of January in the year, 1849, a homestead to each
and every family in this state of a farm, not exceeding eighty acres
of land, and not exceeding in value eight hundred dollars, or a
town or city lot with its appurtenances not exceeding in value
eight hundred dollars, shall be exempt from execution, and from
all liability whatever for all debts thereafter contracted. "

Mr. GRAIN said that the committee on Miscellaneous Sub-
jects had unanimously agreed upon a report upon this subject,
and would report to-day or to-morrow.

Mr. GREGG suggested that as the report would be favorable
to the views of the member from Randolph, he had better with-
hold his motion till it was made.

Mr. BOND expressed himself in favor of the instructions, but
would, at the suggestion of gentlemen around him, defer his re-
marks till another time, when the subject would be more properly
before them.

Mr. ROBBINS, under the circumstances, agreed that the sub-
ject should be laid on the table till the report of the committee
was made.

Mr. BOND asked a suspension of the rules to enable him to
offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That the select committee of twenty-seven appointed

to district the state into senatorial and representative districts

be, and they are hereby instructed, that in their efforts to district

the state into senatorial and representative districts, they shall

722

TUESDAY, AUGUST lo, 184.7 723

first fix upon a starting point either on the north or south extreme of
the state, and when such point is agreed upon by said committee, they
shall proceed to form districts, forming the same out of contigu-
ous territory and keeping in view the principles of apportionment
agreed upon by this convention, until they shall have districted
the whole state, without reference to judicial circuits or congres-
sional districts, as now constituted in this state.

Mr. GREGG opposed the resolution. The committee had
been engaged for some time in their labors and would be ready to
report in a day or two. Moreover they had acted on the very
principle contained in the resolution of the gentleman from Clin-
ton.

Mr. BOND was desirous to have the resolution passed. He
looked in upon the operations of the districting committee last
night, and he thought there was a principle followed, which he
thought very disadvantageous to the section of the state in which
his county was situated. He thought that unless this resolution
was adopted it was probable that the interest of the smaller
counties would be disregarded.

Mr. CHURCHILL said, if the resolution was received, he
would offer the following as a substitute therefor:

Resolved, That this convention will not alter the number of
senators and representatives as arranged at the last session of the
general assembly for the next election of members of general
assembly, and the districts shall remain as then fixed for the next
general assembly.

Mr. PETERS was in favor of the resolution.

Mr. ARMSTRONG said the committee was going on rapidly
with the districting of the state, and he hoped the rules would not
be suspended. He could see no propriety in finding fault with
the action of the committee, before it made its report or had con-
cluded its labors; he could not see the utility in gentlemen throw-
ing barriers in the way of the action of the committee. He hoped
the rules would not be suspended.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac was opposed to the suspension of the
rules. He hoped the committee would be let alone in its opera-
tions and not embarrassed in its labors. The committee had
commenced according to rules contained in the resolution of the

724 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

gentleman from Clinton. They districted the state into senatorial
districts under that rule; and they had undertaken the represent-
ative districts twice and had failed. They first commenced at
the north and went through the state till they reached the south,
and found they had seventy-six districts. They then commenced
at the extreme south and went over the state till they reached the
north, and they came out with seventy-eight districts. Finding
how difficult it was to arrive at the number of seventy-five, they
had referred to the committee-men of each circuit the districting
of their own circuits, and if the committee were left to perform
their work, the districting would be done, and as satisfactorily as
possible.

Mr. BOND replied and urged the necessity of his resolution,
in justice to the small counties.

The question was taken on the suspension of the rules and the
convention refused to suspend — yeas 55, nays 56.

Mr. HAYES moved to suspend the rules to enable him to offer
the following resolution:

Whereas, it is almost time that the labors of this convention
were brought to a close, and any plan of apportionment which
may be adopted will occasion much delay and embarrassment,
and may endanger the adoption of the new constitution, by con-
necting it with local questions and issues; therefore.

Resolved, That this convention will not attempt to district the
state for members of the general assembly — and that the select
committee of twenty-seven be discharged from any further action
on that subject.

Mr. HARVEY agreed with the views expressed in the resolu-
tion, and hoped it would be received.

Mr. CALDWELL opposed the resolution. It would, if re-
ceived, lead to discussion, which would consume as much time
as the report of the Districting committee. Unless we district
this state the next Legislature will contain the large number of
representatives which we have heretofore had, and he thought
that the Convention was spending money enough now, without
having that large body meet again. He was of opinion that the
Convention intended to have the constitution carried into effect
without the aid of the Legislature.

TUESDAY, AUGUST lo, 1847 725

Messrs. Gregg and Armstrong expressed similar views.

The question was taicen on the suspension of the rules, and the
Convention refused to suspend.

The Convention then resumed the consideration of the article
in relation to the Legislative Department.

Sec. 34. The General Assembly shall have no power to sus-
pend any general law for the benefit of any particular individual
nor to pass any law authorizing any proceeding in any court
affecting the property or rights of any individual, other than is
allowed under the general laws of the land, nor to pass any law for
the benefit of individuals inconsistent with the general laws of the
land; nor to pass any law granting to any individual or individuals
rights, privileges, immunities, or exemptions, other than such as
may be, by the same law, extended to any member of the com-
munity who may be able to bring himself within the provisions
of such law; nor shall the Legislature pass any law whereby any
person shall be deprived of his life, liberty, property, or franchises,
without trial and judgment, in some usual and regular judicial
tribunal: Provided, nothing herein contained shall prevent the
passage of any law for seizing and holding persons or property by
mesne process, or otherwise, until such trial can be had, or for
collecting taxes by distress and sale of personal property without
judgment.

Amendments thereto were offered by Messrs. Williams and
ScATES, and adopted.

And the question being taken by yeas and nays on the adop-
tion of the section as amended, it was decided in the negative —
yeas 56, nays 80.

Sec. 2S- In the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-
five, and every tenth year thereafter, an enumeration of all the
white inhabitants of this state shall be made in such manner as
shall be directed by law; and in the year eighteen hundred and
fifty, and every tenth year thereafter, the census taken by au-
thority of the government of the United States shall be adopted
by the General Assembly as the enumeration of this state; and
the number of senators and representatives shall, at the first
regular session holden after the returns herein provided for are
made, be apportioned among the several counties or districts to

726 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

be established by law, according to the number of white inhab-
itants.

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out "regular," and insert
"biennial;" and it was rejected.

Messrs. Lockwood and Peters offered amendments to the
section and they were rejected.

And the section was adopted.

Sec. 36. Senatorial and representative districts shall be com-
posed of contiguous territory bounded by county lines; and only
one senator allowed to each senatorial, and not more than three
representatives to any representative district: provided that
cities and towns containing the requisite population shall be di-
vided into separate districts; but the ratio of representation in such
cities or towns shall be equal to one and a half of that required
for counties; and not more than two representatives shall be
allowed to each of such districts.

Mr. KNOWTTON moved to amend the section so as to read
as follows:

"Senatorial and representative districts shall be composed of
contiguous territory, bounded by county lines; and only one sen-
ator allowed to each senatorial, and not more than three repre-
sentatives to any representative district: Provided, that cities
and towns containing the requisite population may, by law, be
erected into separate districts."

Upon this motion, a debate ensued in which Messrs. Knowl-
TON, West, Peters, Edwards of Madison, Gregg, Sherman
and Pratt advocated the amendment, and Messrs. Thomas and
KxAPP of Jersey opposed it.

Mr. KNAPP moved the previous question, and

Mr. KNOWLTON'S amendment was adopted.

And the section, as amended, was adopted.

Mr. McC ALLEN moved to reconsider the vote just taken,
and then addressed the Convention in favor of the interests of
small counties.

Mr. SINGLETON advocated the reconsideration of the vote.
He did so because he thought the section unjust.

Messrs. Gregg and Palmer of Macoupin opposed, briefly,
the reconsideration.

TUESDAY, AUGUST lo, 1847 ii^

And the motion to reconsider was rejected.

Sec. 37. In forming senatorial and representative districts,
counties containing a population of not more than one-fourth over
the existing ratio shall form separate districts, and the excess
shall not be computed, but shall be added together, and given to
the nearest county or counties not having a senator or represent-
ative, as the case may be, which has the largest white population.

Mr. SMITH of Macon moved to strike out the words "sena-
torial and," and insert "senator or."

Pending which, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The question pending was on the motion of Mr. Smith to
amend.

Messrs. Caldwell, Hayes, McCallen and Harvey opposed
the adoption of the section, and Messrs. Bond and Harding sup-
ported it.

When this section was before the committee of the whole it
was fully discussed, and the debate thereon was fully reported;
the debate to-day turned upon the same points then argued.

The question was taken on the amendment, and it was re-
jected.

Mr. THOMAS moved to amend the section, by striking out
the words "not be computed, but shall be added together, and,"
and the same was adopted.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to amend the section by adding
thereto: " Proy/^^'i, that each senatorial district shall have not
less than three representatives, which district may be sub-divided
for representative districts."

And the same was rejected.

Mr. DEITZ moved to amend the section by striking out
the words "which has the largest white population," and insert
in lieu thereof, "including such excess would be entitled to a
member." Rejected.

The section was adopted as follows — yeas 85, nays 52.

Sec. 37. In forming senatorial and representative districts,
counties containing a population of not more than one-fourth over
the existing ratio shall form separate districts, and the excess

728 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

shall be given to the nearest county or counties not having a sen-
ator or representative, as the case may be, which has the largest
white population.

Section thirty-eight was read.

Mr. Edwards of Sangamon and Mr. Harvey offered amend-
ments thereto; which were adopted, and the section read thus:

Sec. 38. Each General Assembly shall provide for all the
appropriations necessary for the ordinary contingent expenses of
the government, until the adjournment of the next regular session,
the aggregate amount of which shall not be increased without a
vote of two-thirds of each house, nor exceed the amount of revenue
authorized by law to be raised in such time: Pr ovided, the sta.te.
may, to meet casual deficits or failures in revenues, contract
debts, never to exceed in the aggregate fifty thousand dollars;
and the moneys thus borrowed shall be applied to the purpose for
which they were obtained, or to repay the debt thus made, and
to no other purpose; and no debt for any other purpose, except to
repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or defend the state in war,
for payment of which the faith of the state shall be pledged, shall
be contracted, unless the law authorizing the same shall, at a
general election, have been submitted to the people, and have
received a majority of all the votes cast for members of the Gen-
eral Assembly at such election. — The Legislature shall provide for
the publication of said law for three months at least before the
vote of the people shall be taken upon the same; and provision
shall be made, at the time, for the payment of the interest annu-
ally, as it shall accrue, by a tax to be levied for the purpose, or
from other sources of revenue; which law providing for the pay-
ment of such interest by such law shall be irrepealable until such
debts be paid: Provided, further, that the law levying the tax
shall be submitted to the people with the law authorizing the con-
tracting of the debt.

Mr. WITT moved to strike out the words "which law pro-
viding for the payment of such interests, by such tax, shall be irre-
pealable, until such debt shall be paid;' ' and the same, by yeas and
nays, was rejected — yeas 25, nays 106.

Mr. SMITH of Macon moved to add to the section : ' ' pro-
vided that no act of the Legislature shall be referred to the Gov-

TUESDAY, AUGUST lo, 1847 729

ernor for his approval which, under the provisions of this section,
is to be submitted to the people;" which was rejected.

The thirty-eighth section was then adopted, as above.

Sec. 39. The credit of the state shall not, in any manner, be
given to or in aid of any individual association, or corporation.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to add thereto, the following:

"Nor shall the Legislature have power, in any manner, directly
or indirectly, to pass any law or laws conferring a monopoly or
monopolies on any person or persons within this state."

Mr. CALDWELL moved to substitute therefor, the following:

' 'The General Assembly shall be forever prohibited from pass-
ing any private, special or general law renewing, extending, or in
any wise creating or authorizing the exercise of banking powers
or privileges within this state: Provided, that the foregoing clause
be submitted, as a separate section, to the people at the election,
held for the adoption of this constitution, and so on for every ten
years thereafter, and when the same shall be adopted by a majority
of the votes cast for and against it, then such clause, as a separate
section, shall become a part of this constitution and supersede all
other provisions herein to the contrary, subject to be submitted
and voted on, as above prescribed.' '

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon raised a point of order. Could
this proposition be again offered to the Convention, it having
been voted down yesterday?

The PRESIDENT said, the proposition as it now stood has
never been offered, and was in order.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to lay the amendment and
the substitute on the table.

Mr. CALDWELL demanded the yeas and nays, and they
were ordered. The subject was laid on table — yeas 81, nays 53.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to amend the section.

Pending which the Convention adjourned.

LII. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST ii, 1847

Mr. GRAIN from the committee on Miscellaneous Subjects
and Questions, to which had been referred petitions praying a
constitutional provision exempting from sale by judgment and
execution the homestead of each family, made a report on the
subject; which was read, laid on the table and ordered to be
printed.

Mr. HAYES from the committee on Law Reform, reported to
the convention an article on the subject; which was read, laid on
the table and two hundred and fifty copies ordered to be printed.

Mr. CALDWELL moved to suspend the rules to enable cer-
tain reasons, in writing, in the shape of argument in support of
the report just made, to be presented and printed. He thought
this would be found to be the most economical mode of presenting
the question. In case this was denied the friends of law reform
would be obliged to support it in speeches here, which would be
found more expensive than the printing would be.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon objected. It would be a vio-
lation of the rules, and one which he would not consent to in any
case.

Mr. BOND was a member of the committee and thought that
the importance of the subject of Law Reform should be sufficient
cause for a suspension of the rules.

The question was taken and the convention refused to suspend
the rules.

Mr. MOFFETT moved the rules be suspended to enable him
to introduce a resolution that the afternoon sessions of the con-
vention shall commence at 2 p. m., and the convention refused
to suspend.

The convention resumed the consideration of the subject
before it yesterday.

The question pending was the amendment of Mr. Whiteside
to the 39th section.

Mr. WHITESIDE modified his amendment to read as follows:
730

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST ii, 1847 131

"And each county in the state, which has not a representative
by apportionment, shall be entitled to one in the most numerous
branch of the legislature: Provided, that such county will elect
and pay such representative: And provided, further, that if any
county shall elect a representative according to the foregoing pro-
vision, then such county shall not be entitled to vote for a repre-
sentative, with any other county, under the apportionment made
by law, at the same election."

The question was taken on the amendment, by yeas and nays,
and was rejected — yeas 22, nays 115.

Sec. 40. The legislature shall provide by law that the fuel
and stationery furnished for the use of the state; the copying,
printing, binding and distributing the laws and journals, and all
other printing ordered by the general assembly shall be let, by
contract, to the lowest responsible bidder, and that no member of
the general assembly, or other officer of the state, shall be inter-
ested either directly or indirectly in any such contract: Pro-
vided, that the general assembly may fix a maximum price.

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to strike out all in relation to print-
ing, and insert:

"There shall be elected by the qualified voters of this state, a
public printer, who shall hold his office for the term of two years,
and whose compensation shall be fees to be fixed by law."

Mr. B. said he was in favor of having all the officers elective,
and chosen from the citizens of Illinois. The office of a
public printer was an important one, he is the publisher of our
laws, and should be a citizen andresidentofthestate,wherehecould
be held responsible by the people for a breach, of his duty. If
the printing were to be given out to the lowest bidder, any person — ■
whether a citizen of Indiana, or St. Louis, may become the printer
of the state, and would lead not only to much inconvenience, but
that officer might be where he would be beyond any responsibility
to the people. His fees could be fixed by law, as were those of a
sheriflF, and the people then could understand the whole subject,
and know what the officer received. He opposed the system of
letting the printing out by contract, because it always led to col-
lusion and combination on the part of the bidders. Such was
the result in all such cases. He considered the duties to be per-

732

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

formed by the printer required that he should be a state officer,
and as such ought to be elected by the people.

The question was taken on the amendment and it was rejected.

The section was then adopted.

Mr. WILLIAMS offered the following as an additional section:

"The general assembly shall have no power to pass any law,
whereby any person shall be deprived of life, liberty, property or
franchises, without trial, judgment, or decree in some usual and
regular judicial tribunal: Provided, that revenue, taxes, and
assessments, may be collected, and private property may be taken
and applied to public use, and persons and property shall be sub-
ject to arrest and seizure, for purposes of trial, judgment, or
decrees, and persons may be punished for contempts by such tribu-
nals and such manner as the general assembly, by general and
uniform laws, may provide: And provided further, that purchasers
of land sold without judgment for taxes, asserting title by virtue of
such purchase as against the title of the original owner or person
claiming title or possession under such owner, shall be required
to prove, in order to sustain the title asserted as aforesaid, that
the land when sold was liable for taxes, that the same was assessed
and sold conformably to law.' '

Mr. SCATES opposed the section for several reasons. He
thought that the bill of rights was the proper place in which the
life, liberty and property should be secured. Such had been the
course adopted by the constitutions of every state in the Union,
such had been the case in our former constitution, and he could
see no reason to depart from it. He wanted the trial by jury to
be secured permanently in another part of the constitution. He
looked upon the amendment proposed by the member from
Adams as interfering withrthe right to arrest fugitive slaves. He
moved to strike out the words "life and liberty" and then it
could be tested upon its taxable features.

Mr. WILLIAMS said the section had nothing to do with tax
titles; nor did it interfere in any way with the right to arrest
fugitive slaves. The latter was secured by the constitution of
the United States, and no provision in our laws could change the
question.

Mr. HARVEY opposed the section. He wanted no change in

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST ii, 1847 733

the language of the bill of rights. The present constitution se-
cured every man life, liberty and property, and the provision was
a translation of the great magna charta. It was well understood,
had been interpreted, its meaning frequently expounded and its
construction firmly established. Why change it? The same
language was in the constitution of the United States, and of all
the states; why should we change it to meet the desires of the
gentleman from Adams. It appeared to him that it did strike
at tax titles. It requires a trial and judgment before execution
and sale. How can we have a trial in the case of a non-resident
landowner, who owes taxes? Trial requires that the party should
be summoned, and how can we summon them? He looked upon
the section as releasing non-residents entirely from the payment
of taxes.

Mr. THOMAS was in favor of the section. He had some-
thing to do with its preparation and considered it as not inter-
fering with tax titles other than the additional requirements of
notice, &c.

Mr. ANDERSON moved the previous question; which was
not ordered.

Mr. SINGLETON was in favor of the section in its present
shape. He was, when the question was before them in committee
of the whole, of the same opinion as the gentleman from Knox,
but his objections had been obviated by the present language of
the amendment.

Mr. LOCKWOOD thought the Bill of Rights, with the old
provision in it, would be found sufficient protection to the citizen
in his life, property and liberty. He would vote against the whole
section, and at the proper time would move to strike out that por-
tion in relation to tax titles. We had already made ample pro-
visions to protect the landholder from surprise and fraud, and if
this be adopted it will be impossible to establish a good tax title.

Mr. SCATES withdrew his amendment.

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to strike out all in relation to
taxes — yeas 65, nays 43.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the section,
and it was rejected — yeas 65, nays 66.

Mr. ROBBINS offered, as an additional section, the following:

734 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

"The General Assembly shall have no power to alter or amend
any bank charter while the same may be in force in this state;
nor shall any act passed by the General Assembly for the purpose
of creating a bank, be submitted to the people for their ratification
or rejection, until the same shall have been published, for at
least six consecutive weeks, in the public newspaper printed at
the seat of government of this state.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to strike out all after the word
"rejection."

The yeas and nays were ordered and taken, and resulted —
yeas 6, nays io8.

Mr. HURLBUT moved to lay the section on the table; on
which the yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted yeas 90, nays
40.

Mr. PETERS offered an additional section; which was lost.

Mr. THOMAS moved to lay the article on the table for the
present; which motion was carried.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. TURNBULL moved to take up the report of the com-
mittee on the Executive Department, as amended in committee
of the whole.

Mr. DEMENT moved to take up the reports from the Judi-
ciary committee.

And the Convention decided to take up the report on the
Executive Department, section by section.

Section one was read and adopted.

Sec. I. The executive power shall be vested in a Governor.

Sec. 1. The first election of Governor shall be held on the
Tuesday next after the first Monday of November, A. D. 1848;
and the next election shall be held on the Tuesday next after the
first Monday of November, A. D. 1852; and thereafter, elections
for Governor shall be held once in four years, on the Tuesday
next after the first Monday of November. The Governor shall
be chosen by the electors of the members of the General Assembly,
at the same places and in the same manner that they shall respec-
tively vote for members thereof. The returns for every election of

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST ir, 1847 735

Governor shall be sealed up, and transmitted to the seat of govern-
ment by the returning officers, directed to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives, who shall open and publish them in the
presence of a majority of the members of each house of the Gen-
eral Assembly. The person having the highest number of votes
shall be Governor; but if two or more be equal and highest in
votes, then one of them shall be chosen Governor by joint ballot
of both houses of the General Assembly. Contested elections
shall be determined by both houses of the General Assembly in
such manner as shall be prescribed by law.

Mr. GREGG moved to strike out "1848," and insert "1850;"
to strike out "1852," and insert "1854."

Mr. G. made this motion because the adoption of the section
in its present shape, put the present Governor out of office before
the expiration of his term. He thought there was a manifest pro-
priety in his amendment. No one had ever complained of Gov.
French, and there was no justice in saying that he, of all the gov-
ernors of this state, should be cut down in his term.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean replied that there was no force in the
argument. Our judges, who were appointed for life, are to be
put out of office as soon as this constitution is adopted. He could
see no implied or expressed censure of Governor French in this
act. We were laying the foundation of government anew, and all
our officers should commence with it.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the amendment,
and it was rejected — yeas 39, nays 94.

And the section was then adopted.

Sec. 3. The first Governor shall enter upon the duties of his
office on the second Monday of January, A. D. 1849, and shall
hold his office until the second Monday of January, A. D. 1853, and
until another Governor shall be elected and qualified to office;
and forever after, the Governor shall hold his office for the term
of four years, and until another Governor shall be elected and
qualified; but he shall not be eligible for more than four years in
any term of eight years, nor to any other office until after the ex-
piration of his term for which he was elected.

Sec. 4. No person except a citizen of the United States shall
be eligible to the office of Governor; neither shall any person be

736 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of
thirty-five years, and been ten years a resident within this state,
[and have been a citizen of the United States fourteen years].

The question was first taken, by yeas and nays, on agreeing
with the words in brackets, and resulted — yeas 70, nays 68.

And then the section was adopted.

Sec. 5. The Governor shall reside at the seat of government,
and receive for his salary the sum of twelve hundred and fifty
dollars per annum, which shall not be increased nor diminished;
and he shall not, during the time for which he shall have been
elected such Governor, receive any other emolument from the
United States, or any of them.

Mr. POWERS moved to strike out "^1250," and insert
"I1500."

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to strike out, and insert "|iooo."

The question was first taken on striking out, and carried —
yeas 70, nays 60.

And then on inserting ^1500, and decided in the affirmative —
yeas 73, nays 66.

Mr. DEITZ moved to insert, after "governor:" "he
shall also be ex officio fund commissioner;" and it was rejected —
yeas 24, nays 1 14.

The section was then adopted.

The following sections were adopted:

Sec. 6. Before he enters upon the execution of the duties of
his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation, to wit:
"I do solemnly swear — or affirm — that I will faithfully execute
the duties appertaining to the office of Governor of the State of
Illinois; and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and
defend the constitution of this state; and will, also, support the
constitution of the United States.' '

Sec. 7. He shall, from time to time, give the General Assembly
information of the state of the government, and recommend to
their consideration such measures as he shall deem expedient.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST ii, 1847 737

subject to such regulations as may be provided by law relative
to the manner of applying for pardons. Upon conviction for
treason, he shall have power to suspend the execution of the sen-
tence until the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at
its next meeting; when the General Assembly shall either pardon
the convict or commute the sentence, direct the execution of the
sentence, or grant a further reprieve. He shall, biennially, com-
municate to the General Assembly each case of reprieve, commu-
tation or pardon granted; stating the name of the convict, the
crime for which he was convicted, the sentence and its date, and
the date of commutation, pardon, or reprieve.

Sec. 9. He may require information in writing from the offi-
cers in the Executive Department, upon any subject relating to
the duties of their respective offices, and shall take care that the
laws be faithfully executed.

Sec. 10. He may, on extraordinary occasions, convene the
General Assembly by proclamation, and shall state to them, in
said proclamation, the purpose for which they are to convene;
and the General Assembly shall enter on no legislative business
except that for which they were especially called together.

Sec. II. He shall be commander-in-chief of the army and
navy of this state, and of the militia, except when they shall be
called into the service of the United States.

Sec. 12. In case of disagreement between the two houses
with respect to the time of adjournment, the Governor shall have
power to adjourn the General Assembly to such time as he thinks
proper; provided it be not to a period beyond the next constitu-
tional meeting of the same.

Sec. 13. A Lieutenant Governor shall be chosen at every
election of Governor, in the same manner, continue in office for
the same time, and possess the same qualifications. In voting
for Governor and Lieutenant Governor, the electors shall dis-
tinguish whom they vote for as Governor and whom as Lieuten-
ant Governor.

Sec. 14. The Lieutenant Governor shall, by virtue of his
office, be speaker of the Senate; have a right, when in committee
of the whole, to debate and vote on all subjects, and, whenever
the Senate are equally divided, to give the casting vote.

738 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sec. 15. Whenever the government shall be administered by
the Lieutenant Governor, or he shall be unable to attend as speaker
of the Senate, the senators shall elect one of their own members as
speaker for that occasion; and if, during the vacancy of the office
of Governor, the Lieutenant Governor shall be impeached, re-
moved from office, refuse to qualify, or resign, or die, or be absent
from the state, the speaker of the Senate shall in like manner
administer the government.

Sec. 16. The Lieutenant Governor, while he acts as speaker
of the Senate, shall receive for his service the same compensa-
tion which shall, for the same period, be allowed to the speaker of
the House of Representatives, and no more.

Sec. 17. If the Lieutenant Governor shall be called upon to
administer the government, and shall, while in such administra-
tion, resign, die, or be absent from the state, during the recess of
the General Assembly, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State
for the time being to convene the Senate for the purpose of choos-
ing a speaker.

Sec. 18. In case of the impeachment of the Governor, his
absence from the State, or inability to discharge the duties of his
office, the powers, duties and emoluments of the office shall devolve
upon the Lieutenant Governor; and in case of his death, resig-
nation, or removal, then upon the speaker of the Senate for the
time being, until the Governor, absent or impeached, shall return
or be acquitted; or until the disqualification or inability shall
cease; or until a new Governor shall be elected and qualified.

Sec. 19. In case of a vacancy in the office of Governor, for any
other cause than those herein enumerated; or in case of the death
of the Governor elect before he is qualified into office, the powers,
duties, and emoluments of the office shall devolve upon the Lieu-
tenant Governor, or speaker of the Senate, as above provided for,
until a new Governor be elected and qualified.

Section twenty was then taken up.

Sec. 20. Every bill which shall have passed the Senate and
House of Representatives shall, before it becomes a law, be pre-
sented to the Governor: if he approve, he shall sign it; but if not,
he shall return it, with his objections, to the house in which it
shall have originated; who shall enter the objections at large on

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST ii, 1847 739

their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such recon-
sideration, three-fifths of the members elected shall agree to pass
the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other
house; by which it shall likewise be reconsidered; and if approved
by three-fifths of the members elected, it shall become a law, not-
withstanding the objections of the Governor. But in all such
cases, the votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas and
nays, and the names of the members voting for and against the
bill shall be entered, on the journal of each house, respectively.
If any bill shall not be returned by the Governor within ten days —
Sundays excepted — after it shall have been presented to him,
the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it,
unless the Legislature shall, by their adjournment, prevent its
return; in which case, the said bill shall be returned on the first
day of the meeting of the General Assembly after the expiration of
said ten days, or be a law.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to strike out "three-
fifths" wherever it occurred, and insert in lieu thereof "a major-
ity."

The yeas and nays were demanded on the motion, and re-
sulted— yeas 71, nays 67.

The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, on the adoption
of the section, and it resulted yeas 74, nays 65.

Sec. 21. Each Governor shall nominate and, by and with the
advice of the Senate, appoint a Secretary of State, whose term of
office shall expire with the office of the Governor, by whom he
shall have been nominated, and who shall hold his office until his
successor is appointed and qualified; who shall keep a fair register
of the official acts of the Governor, and, when required, shall lay
the same and all papers, minutes, and vouchers relative thereto,
before either branch of the General Assembly; and shall perform
such other duties as shall be assigned him by law, and who shall
receive a salary of eight hundred dollars per annum, and no more,
except tees; Provided, the Governor shall have power to remove
the secretary, when in his judgment the public good shall require
it, and to appoint another.

Mr. PRATT offered an amendment, making the office of sec-
retary of State elective; which was adopted.

740 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. VANCE moved to add to the section: "there shall be
elected, &c., all the clerks required in the office of the treasurer,
auditor, and secretary of State."

Pending which, the Convention adjourned

LIII. THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847

The question pending at the adjournment yesterday, was on
the amendment of Mr. Vance.

Mr. SMITH of Macon moved to lay it on the table; which
was decided in the affirmative.

Mr. PRATT moved to strike out the section and insert the
following:

' 'There shall be elected by the qualified electors of the state, at
the same time of the election for governor, a secretary of state,
whose term of office shall be the same as that of the governor, who
shall keep a fair register of the official acts of the governor,
and when required, shall lay the same and all papers, minutes and
vouchers relative thereto, before either branch of the General
Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as shall be assigned
him by law, and shall receive a salary of $800 per annum, and no
more, except fees; provided, that if the office of secretary of state
should be vacated by death, resignation or otherwise, it shall be
the duty of the governor to appoint another, who shall hold his
office until another secretary shall be elected and qualified."

The substitute was adopted, and the section as amended was
also adopted.

Sections 11 and 23 were read and adopted.

Sec. 22. All grants and commissions shall be sealed with the
great seal [of state,] signed by the governor or person administer-
ing the government, and countersigned by the secretary of state.

Sec. 23. The governor and all other civil officers under this
state shall be liable to impeachment for misdemeanor in office,
during their continuance in office, and for two years thereafter.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to reconsider the vote by which
section 20 was adopted, with a view to restore the veto power
to its former force, which was not agreed to — yeas 68, nays 73.

Mr. SCATES moved to reconsider the vote adopting section
2, with a view of fixing the time of the election of the next gover-

741

742 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

nor at a period that would enable the present governor to conclude
his term of office.

Messrs. Lockwood, Davis of Montgomery, Caldwell,
Whitney, Singleton and Hayes opposed the motion, Messrs.
ScATES and Pratt advocated it, and the Convention refused to
reconsider the vote^yeas 42, nays loi.

Mr. WITT moved to reconsider the vote on section 5, in rela-
tion to the salary of the governor, and the Convention refused to
reconsider — yeas 64, nays 76.

Mr. THOMAS offered an additional section; for which Mr.
ScATES offered a substitute; and both of which Mr. Z. Casey
moved to lay on the table, and the Convention so decided — yeas
66, nays 53.

Mr. SERVANT moved the article be referred to the committee
on Revision, &c.

Mr. SHUMWAY moved to suspend the rules to enable him
to introduce a rule that members shall not be allowed to crowd
round the secretary's desk during the taking of the yeas and nays.
The Convention refused to suspend the rules.

THE JUDICIARY

Mr. SINGLETON moved to take up the report of the select
committee of twenty-seven on the Judiciary, whereupon ensued a
discussion upon a point of order, as to the proper mode of pro-
ceeding with the report and the two minority reports, in which
Messrs. Constable, Dement, Singleton, Edwards of Madison,
Rountree, Z. Casey and the President participated, which
resulted in

Mr. DEMENT moving to substitute the minority report. No.
I, reported by himself, for the report of the majority.

Mr. CALDWELL hoped the motion would not prevail. The
report of the majority embraced a whole system, county courts
included, while the minority report only embraced the superior
courts.

Mr. SCATES suggested to the gentleman from Lee to modify
his motion so as to substitute his report for the first twelve sections
and the last four sections.

Mr. DEMENT did so modify his motion.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 743

Mr. SCATES addressed the Convention in favor of the motion,
and in support of the election of the supreme court by general
ticket, in opposition to their choice by three grand divisions.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, that the judiciary was the most im-
portant department of the government. It had a jurisdiction
over the life, liberty and property of individuals, and therefore its
importance. It becomes us then to particularly inquire into the
best mode of selecting the judges. He was in favor of the dis-
trict system. A judge was elected in each district; and the people
of each district had the choice of one judge, and were therefore
fully represented on the bench. The same argument against the
district system would apply to the Legislature. A member of
that body assisted in passing laws for the whole state and for the
whole people, and would any one contend that because he did so,
that he should be chosen by the whole people? Because he acted
in part in making laws to govern people in the other parts of the
state, should he be elected by the whole people? He thought
differently. He considered, that as the people by the choice of
representatives by districts were represented in the legislature,
so would the interests and the people of the respective districts be
as fairly represented by having the judges elected in such districts.
Again, he had come to the conclusion that under the present state
of affairs in Illinois, the best mode of selecting judges was by leav-
ing them to be chosen by the people; and as a great auxiliary
to the people in choosing them, he thought the district
system should be adopted; because that they would be more likely
and more certainly have a better knowledge and acquaintance
with the candidates for the office. This alone was a sufficient
reason why he should vote for the district system. It had been
said here that men could be chosen for the office in the district who
could not be elected by the whole people. This was, to him, an
argument in favor of the district system. It showed that the
people, when they knew the man, were acquainted with his quali-
fications, &c., would rise above party considerations and elect
him. He deprecated the time when the election of our judiciary
should be based upon party principles. He would regret the day
when a man's recommendation for the office of a supreme judge was
based upon his party feelings and sentiments. A man nominated

744 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

by the whig or democratic conventions, would always be voted
for by the people in all parts of the state where he was not known,
on no other ground than that of his politics, and thus a man might
be rejected by the whole people who did not know him, on account
of his politics, when the people in the district where he resided,
and who knew his abilities and qualifications, would elect him if
they alone had the choice. He considered the district system the
best in securing a pure, able and competent bench.

Mr. MINSHALL addressed the Convention briefly in support
of the district system, as bringing the election of the judges nearer
to the people than did the general ticket system.

[Mr. MINSHALL said,^' that a remark had been made by the
gentleman from Jefferson, to the effect, that one of the majority of
the committee of 27 on the Judiciary had said, that the report
of the majority proposed one of the must unfit and inefficient
systems that could be devised. No such remark had been made
in committee by any one of the majority. It was the gentleman
from Fulton who was not now present (Mr. Wead,) who made
the remark alluded to by the gentleman from Jefferson, or remarks
in their nature and tendency very similar. The remarks which
he had made concerning the report, and his objections to it were
very different. It is true, continued Mr. Minshall, that about
the time the vote was taken in committee, as most of the members
voting for the majority report had committed themselves to the
support of the report in the convention, on the ground that they
regarded it as a compromise, by their votes and remarks; and as
I differed entirely with the committee in regard to the compro-
mise, and entertained objections to two of the sections in the
majority report, viz: the third and sixth sections; and third sur-
rendering the power to the legislature of changing at any time
they might choose the organization of the court by changing the
mode of election to general ticket, or from general ticket to dis-
tricting, as the different parties might prevail in the legislature;
the sixth section giving the legislature power over the sittings of
the supreme court, to require them to hold their terms at three
places, with power to alter and change them, either to the extent

"This speech by Minshall is taken from the Sagamo Journal, August 24.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 745

of requiring a term to be held in each judicial circuit or to reduce
it to one single place, that being the seat of government. This
power I thought, and still think, puts the supreme court completely
under the control of the legislature; a position, in my mind of all
others, which we should most avoid in forming the judiciary
department. The judiciary, particularly the supreme court, being
a co-ordinate branch and one, which from the nature of our insti-
tutions, would be most like to come in contact with the legislature
when called upon to give construction to their legislative action,
in view of all constitutional questions, was of all others, most
necessary to be removed far from legislative control or influence,
and should in no manner be accountable to, or under the influence
of the legislature other than by the general provisions holding
them accountable to the people through their representative, for
a faithful discharge of their duties, and for misdemeanor or mis-
conduct in office. Entertaining these views, I conceived that I
could under no circumstance surrender them, and could not re-
gard it in the nature of a compromise. But rather than be looked
upon as an impracticable, voted for the report of the majority to
enable them to make their report as a basis for action in the con-
vention, but at the same time distinctly stating that in so doing,
I should not be considered as committed to the whole report,
and reserving to myself the right, that if the minority or any one
else produced a report that better accorded with my judgment
and views, I should certainly give it my support in preference.

If, then, I am the person alluded to by the gentleman from
Jefferson, he is mistaken. It was the gentleman from Fulton, who
was one of the majority, and appeared to be generally dissatisfied
with the report, and more particularly with the county court
system in which he had figured conspicuously, — which, no doubt,
will be remembered by other gentlemen of the committee. The
most that I said at the time was, that I would not commit myself
to the support of the whole of the report. My objection, however,
will be seen not to be against the districting system; — for that has
been my favorite plan from the commencement, — but because it
did not give that system in full and perfectly free from legislative
interference hereafter. In regard to the rest of the report, except
these two sections, I concurred with the committee, and do now.

746 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

While up for the purpose of this explanation, in regard to the
reason why I prefer the district to any other system of these
times, I can state them in a very few words (although I labor
under great terror, and perhaps unnecessary fear of the abomi-
nable fifteen minute rule, and no reply.) I have differed for some
time with most of my political friends in regard to the election of
judges. In the first place I look upon the office of judge as alto-
gether different from most offices. The nature of the duty is
such that the judge who is desirous even for re-election, can only
secure that result by a faithful performance of his duty. He has
to perform his high trust openly before the public in the presence
of all that choose to assemble in the courts. The matters in hand,
concerning all the public, and particularly the parties immediately
interested on trial, within the keen sight of the parties, and
the still more sharpened vision of lawyers of the parties, and the
general interest of the bar — how can the judge dare to show any
favoritism for the one party or the other for the sake of popular-
ity? Would not all he gained from the favored party, be more
than counterbalanced by the loss of the other, and still more by
the general indignation that would be excited in the whole com-
munity, of all parties, at such conduct? Could the judge possibly
escape detection? Certainly not. Why should the judges of the
supreme court be elected in districts? Because, in adopting the
elective system, we are departing from an old established system, —
that of appointment during good behavior. We cannot rely on
appointment for a term of years unless we render the incumbent
ineligible to re-appointment; because if liable to re-appointment
it inclines the judge to look too much to the governor as the
source and fountain of power, and therefore is likely to create too
much dependence on that quarter. We cannot agree on a term
long enough to render the judges ineligible after one term. Be-
sides in these days appointments are governed and made by
interest and associating influences and combination, and recom-
mendation altogether foreign to the old times, and having but
little regard to the general welfare. I have been inclined to
depart from this system for some years back, and I hold it to be
a cardinal principle that when we depart from an old established
system, which may have been antiquated or is subject to con-

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 747

demnation by misusages, we should look with caution and cir-
cumspection considering the fitness and nature of things for the
next best plan. I am therefore for electing upon the ground that
the people will choose better men for their officers than we can
expect to obtain under any other system. I am for election in
districts, because it gives the people a better opportunity of
exercising a correct judgment in their choice. If you will give
them a fair chance to know something of the man they are to vote
for, something of his qualities, his legal attainments, his integrity,
his independence, and of all that makes up the fitness for the
station, I feel confident the district plan affords to the voter most
opportunity for this. It brings the voter and the voted for nearer
together; affords men means of acquaintance, and if trusting to
the integrity and good intention of the people this means of
selecting their judges is adopted, it is reasonable to suppose they
will select the very best from one party or the other to perform
the high functions of this office.

As to the position taken by the gentleman from Jefferson,
that the court is to be regarded in the light of a representative
body — if it is meant to assume that the court is to be so regarded,
I do not agree with him. It is insisted by those who take that
position that the judge will not represent all the State, or in other
words that one-third of the State will make a judge for the other
two, and that the judge will have the power to decide for persons
that have no voice in electing him; and that therefore as the
supreme court are the judges for the whole State, the whole State
should vote for them. This argument is more specious than sound.
If gentlemen will have the court a representative body, which
may be conceded for the sake of argument merely, the argument
proves nothing, for by reference to the manner of constituting
the truly representative branch in the government, the House of
Representatives and Senate, the same objection would apply.

The Representatives and Senators, it must be admitted, in
all matters of general concern, and in the enactment of general
laws for the whole community, are the representatives and sena-
tors for the whole State, yet they are elected from counties and
single districts. But really the objection that the judges will
have to decide for voters of a district who may not have voted for

748 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

him, instead of being an objection constitutes one of its best
recommendations.

These are some of the reasons why I have adhered with tenac-
ity to the districting system in the election of supreme judges,
and another may be named in departing from old and settled
usages and systems in matters of such moment when the mind is
satisfied with reasons for the change owing to the mutability
and uncertainty of all things pertaining to society, governments, and
their transition from one form to another. We feel more safety
in having a precedent before us. In adhering to the district plan
we will have followed the example that has been set us by the
State of Mississippi, and which we have followed in adopting the
elective judiciary, and we have abundant evidence before us that
in that State the system has worked well. If the precedent is
good in part, the reasons for it would also seem to assure us that
it is good throughout. Let us then try it in its true spirit and see
if the system if followed out will not work as well in this State as
in that.]

Mr. DAVIS of Massac begged the attention of the Convention
for a few moments, while he expressed a few words in relation to
the reports before the Convention. The argument advanced
now, and when the subject was before them on a previous occasion,
in favor of the election of the judges of the supreme court, was,
that they should be elected by the whole people, if they were
to be elected at all. For this view, for this system of an election
of the judiciary by general ticket, there was no precedent to
be found in the Union. Not a single precedent could be found
to support it. The only two states that we can look to as prec-
edents for an elective judiciary are the states of Mississippi and
New York under her new constitution. But, sir, in the state of
Mississippi they had wisely provided against the election of the
supreme court by general ticket; they had carefully avoided that
evil. They had divided the state into three districts, and one of
the judges was elected from each district. The experience of the
people of that state under this provision has been shown to us in
the debate on this question at a former day. Mr. D. read the
provision in the Mississippi constitution upon the subject. Nor,

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 749

said he, is the state of New York any precedent in favor of this
general ticket system. What does it provide? It does not pro-
vide for the election of the whole court of appeals — the court of
final resort — -by general ticket. They have provided that that
court shall be composed of four judges to be elected by general
ticket, and four to be chosen by the qualified electors in separate
districts. Then, sir, the gentlemen have no grounds to sustain
this principle upon; they having nothing here or elsewhere to
support them. There is no ground in the state of feeling on the
subject in Illinois to sustain them. But on the contrary, there is
reason to believe that no such system as they propose should be
adopted. There is good ground for us to believe that the people
of the state of Mississippi, when they adopted this district plan,
were actuated by an apprehension that if the court were elected
by the whole people, it would become an engine of tyranny and
an instrument of despotism. Mr. D. read an extract from the
constitution of the state of New York, to show that the court of
appeals — the court of final resort, was to be composed of the four
judges to be elected by general ticket, and of others to be chosen
in districts. These judges, sir, who make up this court are to be
chosen by the voters of the state in their respective districts, not
by general ticket. Where, then, is the precedent for this system?
Where the precedent for the election of a tribunal of last resort by
the general ticket system ? No where. Not in a single state of the
Union can it be found. Not a single precedent for this proposition
can be found in the whole United States. It is therefore an experi-
ment. The whole plan of an elective judiciary is an experiment,
but are we to be launched upon the sea of experiment with no
light of experience to guide us ? He hoped not. If the Convention
substituted the report of the gentleman from Lee for that of
the majority of the committee, then, sir, all responsibility
on the part of the judges to the people was gone, forever
gone. The judges would look not to the people for support, not
to them for confidence, but to the party leaders of the day. They
would not feel the responsibility which would attach were he
obliged to look to the people of his own district to sustain him, and
were they alone to judge of his conduct. What is the difference
between the two reports? The majority report says the state

750 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

shall be divided into three grand divisions, as nearly equal as may-
be, and the qualified electors of each division shall elect one of the
said judges for the term of nine years; provided, that after the
first election of said judges, the legislature may have the power to
provide by law for their election by the whole state or by divisions
as it may deem most expedient. The minority report says, the
state shall be divided into three districts, as nearly equal in pop-
ulation as may be, and the qualified electors of the state shall elect
the three judges, one of whom shall reside in each district. It
would be perceived that under the majority report, the legislature
had the power after the first election, in case it was found to
operate badly, to change the system to the general ticket plan.
But in the minority report no such power was given. It was fixed
permanently and positively; if found to act badly, there was no
power given to change or alter it. Under the former, if such a case
should ever arise, that the legal talent of the state should be
gathered at one section, then the legislature may have the power
to provide for a change from the district system; but under the
minority report, they must come one from each district, and it
cannot be changed or altered, and the only object which can be
secured is, that they shall be elected by the whole people — by
general ticket. Their whole argument is swept away. We have
no precedent any where for what they propose, and are we pre-
pared to adopt it? There are, however, precedents for the dis-
trict plan. We have the experience of the two states, Mississippi
and New York, both of whom have adopted it. Shall we dis-
regard them ? Are we not to look at the lamp of experience burn-
ing at our feet, and venture upon an untried experiment, which
before his God, he considered the most mischievous and most
fraught with evil, ruin, and disaster to the rights and liberties of
the people that could be presented. He hoped the amendment
would not be adopted. Much time had already been consumed
in the discussion of this subject, and he did not desire to detain
the Convention. But he sincerely hoped that the Convention
would retain the district provision to establish a supreme court,
a court of final resort, that will give general satisfaction, and
which may be looked up to with pride.

Mr. DEMENT was sorry to take up the time of the Conven-

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 751

tion by a discussion of the question now before them, particularly
as it had been discussed fully and ably by gentlemen on a former
occasion. But in answer to what had been said, he would remind
the Convention that there were many views governing the friends
of the minority report, different from those attributed to them by
the two gentlemen, from Adams and from Massac. Nor had
they come to the conclusions embodied in that report without full
deliberation, and consideration of the subject, as is assumed by
the gentleman from Massac. Sir, is there nothing in which the
two reports differ, but that of the mode of electing the judges?
He thought there were several points in which the reports differed,
and those differences were sufficient to induce him to vote for
the minority report, in preference to that of the majority. He
had, on a former occasion, expressed his sentiments on all the
points involved in the question of the judiciary, and would now
confine himself entirely to the question of those two reports, and
touch upon some of the points alluded to by the gentleman from
Massac. He speaks of an apparent inconsistency in the minority
report, which confines the selection of the judges of the supreme
court to the districts, and his argument was based upon the danger
of the possibility that all the legal talent of the state might be
found to be in one section of the state. Such an argument needs
no reply, and Mr. D. would not detain the Convention by showing
its fallacy.

Mr. DAVIS said, that he had never said there was any danger
of such a thing as the whole legal talent being concentrated in one
section of the state. He had alluded to it merely to show the
impossibility, under the minority report, of changing the mode of
election to meet the changes that may take place in the condition
and circumstances of the people.

Mr. DEMENT said, he had given way for an explanation —
not a speech — and he had not attributed to the gentleman any
such remark [as] that he complained of, when he did, it was time for
the gentleman to complain. But it was urged by the member
from Massac so tenaciously, it was nothing more than a fair con-
clusion, that he look upon the probability of such a thing as an
argument. If not, why did he urge it? The gentleman objects
to the provision, and cites the majority report as a better system

752 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

and argues that the only mode to preserve the purity and integrity
of the bench, is not only to confine the selection of the judges, but
also, their election to the three districts. This is his proposition,
to be a fixed rule until after the first election. The character,
integrity and ability of the court are to be decided by the voters
of one district — by a majority of one-third of the state — by a
little more than one-sixth of the people, and this is the place pro-
posed to give the people the election of the judiciary. Again, the
proposition of the gentleman divides the state not into three
divisions as regards population, but in respect to territory, where-
by one division, with a small fraction of population, may have the
decision of the character, &c., of the court. The minority report
is different, it proposes these divisions to be laid off with respect
to population. Another difference in the report; the minority
propose a different term of office — six years. When the matter
was before us before, the Convention, by a large majority, fixed
the term of office at six years, and the minority have followed that
decision. The majority, however, have set this aside, have said
the expressed will of the majority of the Convention shall not be
law, and have fixed in their report the term at nine years. He
was also opposed to leaving this great power of control over the
judiciary, with the Legislature. He wanted to have it fixed, per-
manently and firmly fixed in the constitution, and the department
left wholly independent of the Legislature. Another reason why
he opposed the majority report, was that a majority of this Con-
vention have decided that the supreme court shall hold a number
of terms in places throughout the state, and yet this majority of
the committee have come into the Convention, with the term fixed
at one place in each of the three divisions, and then the Legislature
is entrusted with the power to change it. This is a great power
to give the Legislature, and he had not expected it to come from
the quarter whence it did, who have all during the session preached
to us continually — distrust to the legislature. There was yet
another difference between the two reports: in the majority re-
port, they fixed the circuits at twelve in number; we think that
nine are ample for the present exigencies of the time, and the con-
dition and business of the people. The majority also provide for
the election of an attorney general and prosecuting attorneys, and

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 753

leave with the Legislature the fixing of their pay and duties;
to the giving to the Legislature this power, he was also opposed.
In the minority report, the salary of those officers was fixed; if
the sum was too high or too low, it could be changed, but let us
not leave it open to the Legislature. We want permanence and
stability in our judicial system, and we should fix it so in the con-
stitution, and all our officers should be above the influence and
control of the Legislature.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean said he admired the tactics of the
gentleman from Lee, so well displayed in the address he had just
made. He had appealed to all those who held views different
from the majority report in all the details, to vote for striking out
and inserting his own report, while he had rather avoided the true
question involved in the point. — The gentleman from Jefferson,
who entertains the same views with the member from Lee, with
his characteristic candor, had stated the true question before
them to be whether the judges of the supreme court shall be elected
by districts or by general ticket. The gentleman from Lee, how-
ever, to catch the votes of others, has alluded to the other differ-
ences between the reports. He has alluded to the fact, that the
Convention decided that the term of office should be six years,
instead of nine, as reported; but, sir, did not the Convention de-
cide, by a much stronger and decided vote, that the judges should
be elected from districts? If so, why, according to his own reason-
ing, has he come in here with his general ticket system? Can he
not, when the question comes up, move to strike out nine and in-
sert six? The majority of the committee, however, with a decided
majority in their favor, have come in with a report in which the
views of all these gentlemen are compromised. — They pro-
pose a provision as a compromise, which makes the judiciary
elective by districts for the present, but leaves with the Legislature
power to change it, in case it is found to work badly. Mr. D.
was in favor of one supreme court to be held at the seat of govern-
ment, but as a compromise, he was willing to give up his own
opinion and leave with the Legislature power to fix the time
and place of the sitting of the court — either in one place in each
grand division, or more places than one in each division, or after
1850, to have it fixed permanently at the seat of government.

754 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

As to the complaints of the gentleman from Lee, that the majority
have departed from the decisions of the Convention, he would
remind the gentleman that the Convention had decided in
favor of twelve circuits, yet the minority report had fixed the num-
ber at nine only. — The majority has followed the expressed opin-
ions of the Convention as nearly as may be, yet they have also
endeavored to meet the various opinions of the gentlemen, by
presenting a compromise. The gentleman from Lee has not met
the arguments in favor of the district system. He has not at-
tempted to answer the argument of the gentlemen who have
taken the position that the district system is the better, because
it brings the election of the judges nearer to the people, who,
thereby, can make a better selection for the office, than if the
judge was chosen from the state at large, when they would not be
acquainted with his character and abilities.

Mr. AKIN said, that it was apparent that they were to have
long speeches on this subject; therefore, to enable gentlemen to
gain some wind, he moved the Convention adjourn. And it did
adjourn till 3, p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention was called, and as soon as a quorum appeared,
the report of the Judiciary committee was again taken up. The
question pending was on the motion of Mr. Dement.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said, that neither proposition —
neither the general ticket nor the district system, was a favorite
of his. He was in favor of the old mode of electing the judges —
by the Governor and the Senate. Ithadbeen, however,settledthat
the judiciary was to be elective and he would be obliged to vote
for the form least objectionable. The people either were or were
not competent to the election of the judiciary, if they were, and
such was the opinion of the majority of the Convention, why cheat
them with this mockery of an elective judiciary, the district
system. Why say to the people, you shall have the power to
elect the supreme court, yet your voice shall not be heard
in the choice of two-thirds of that court. The gentlemen from
Massac and McLean have told us that there are no precedents to
be found for this general ticket system. The demand for prec-
edents comes with a bad grace from those gentlemen. They

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 ISS

have advocated here an elective judiciary, which is opposed to all
the precedents and experience of ages. They have argued against
a system of appointment of the judiciary, which has stood the
test of centuries, and has never been found mischievous, but
which has been sanctioned and approved by all the lights of wis-
dom and experience of the past and the well approved usage of
ages. They tell us that this plan of an elective judiciary has
worked well in Mississippi; that there it is found to be an excellent
substitute for the old plan; this may be, sir, but it is just in its
beginning; and it may be found that, like the man who went up
in the tree to fly, he started admirably, but came to the ground
very hard. Such may be the case with this Mississippi plan.
They have argued before us that the people have the capacity to
elect judges of the supreme court; that it is a right properly be-
longing to them, and one which they can and ought to exercise.
If this be the case, why cheat them with this pretended election —
this power to elect one of the judges, and denying them the right
to be heard in the choice of the other two? — Suppose the state be
divided into three districts — a northern, southern and a middle
district. Suppose we, at the south, elect a man who is utterly
incompetent to discharge the duties of the office, whom can the
people of the north and in the middle districts hold responsible
for the act? On whom can they visit their punishment? On
no one, sir. There is no responsibility anywhere; yet the decis-
ions of that court may be governed by that man. In such a point
of view, the district system is more objectionable than the present
mode of electing them by the Legislature; for now, if a man be
elected who is incompetent and unworthy of the office, the con-
stituents of those who elect him may hold them to strict account
for the violation of their duty and trust. The argument that it
would be as proper to elect the Legislature by general ticket as
the judges of this supreme court, is not a true one, and totally in-
applicable to the point. There is no representative principle upon
the bench as there is in the Legislature; in that body the different
county and local interests are represented — for the purpose of
preventing one from encroaching upon the others. But the
supreme court is different. — It is not a representative of any one
interest or section; it is, emphatically, a state tribunal. — Gentle-

756 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

men deprecate party spirit in the election of judges; they have
denounced the general ticket as calculated to produce party con-
ventions, and party caucuses. Admit it. And will you, by
the district system, avoid this? Will you not have district con-
ventions to nominate party candidates? — Most certainly you will;
and will they not be followed just as well? Do not the lines laid
down by Congressional conventions, county conventions, and
district conventions, be [sic] as closely followed and observed as the
state nominations? Mr. P. said he was in favor of the plan of
appointment by the Governor and Senate, but if the election was
to be given to the people, he was in favor of giving it to the whole
people.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery saw no difference in the question
as it stood now, and as it did when before us on a former
occasion. The question then was, shall the judges be elected by
an unqualified general ticket, or by districts. The same question
is now presented, with this difference: that then, the advocates of
the general ticket system declared that locality had nothing to do
with the question, and now they come in with a report, that the
judges shall reside in one of the three grand divisions. By this,
they have abandoned their ground; have given up their position,
that the judges should be chosen, irrespective of locality, and, in
so doing, have admitted the correctness of the district system.
They are willing, now, to give the whole people the power to elect
all the judges, but they require that they shall elect one of them
from each of the three grand divisions, which appeared to him
more of a solemn mockery than anything he had seen yet.

Mr. FARWELL did not consider that in presenting the mi-
nority report, the friends of the general ticket system had aban-
doned any principle. It made no difference where the men were
chosen from — if they were all chosen from one county — so the
whole people had a voice in their election. It had been argued
that the nearer the judges were brought to the people, the better
it would be — the better the selection would prove. If such were
true, and that was the best mode of obtaining upright and able
judges, then why not carry out the principle to the greatest per-
fection by providing that the judges shall be chosen and elected
by^the voters of the three counties in which they are to sit? This

THURSDAY, AUGUST i3, 1847 757

would be bringing the doctrine to perfection, and he asked those
who advocated it, why they did not carry it out? The division of
the state into three grand divisions, and having them vote sepa-
rately and for different general officers, would have the effect of
alienating the different sections of the state, and cause sectional
feelings to spring up, which would be felt in the decisions of the
court, as the judges would naturally be governed by the same
feelings as those entertained by the people who elected them.
Such would not be the case if they were elected by general ticket,
for then they would be above all local feelings, and not influenced
by sectional interests, but would seek to act as a court for the
whole state and the whole people. He would prefer the election
of the judges by the whole people, but rather than vote for the
district system, he would vote for their appointment by the Gov-
ernor and Senate.

Mr. KITCHELL was opposed to the elective system, both
general ticket and district, and in favor of the old and long tried
plan of appointment by the Governor and Senate; and this, if
from no other reason than because of the objections urged against
the two elective plans, by the respective opponents of each.

We have a full report of Mr. K.'s remarks, but they are
crowded out by the press of matter.

Mr. CALDWELL said, that at length he had succeeded in
catching the eye of the speaker. He desired to say a few words
upon the question, upon which he was sorry to say he was sepa-
rated from many of the friends with whom he generally acted;
and he was separated from them only because his most solemn
convictions were in favor of the position he occupied. He was in
favor of a free, pure, upright and independent judiciary. With-
out independence the judiciary became an engine of tyranny, it
became a central consolidated despotism. A pure and independ-
ent judiciary had always been sought; it was a theme on which all
the light of the common law had shone. It is now proposed to
establish an impure, a political judiciary — the plan is before us.
A gentleman has advocated, here, to-day, the election of the judi-
ciary by general ticket, because that is the mode, in his opinion,
to make it independent. That gentleman is too new a convert to
the elective judiciary for me to follow. Mr. C. remembered

758 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

when he (Mr. Scates) opposed the elective system. He has but
lately become an advocate of it. I have studied it long, have
always been in favor of it, and it is to be presumed know some-
thing about it. Sir, when you make the judiciary elective by
general ticket you concentrate its powers, it becomes a central
power, and as such it is highly dangerous, and should be avoided.
There is but one basis upon which all elections are founded, and
that is upon representation. The elective judiciary is a repre-
sentative body; all our elections are upon the principle of represen-
tation. Our Congress, our Legislature, and all deliberative bodies,
are representative assemblages, and they are all elected by dis-
tricts. We have now a better court than any that can be chosen
by general ticket, and it is chosen by districts. Our senate, a
tribunal appointed to try impeachments. It is one which is
worthy of the highest respect, and upon which the utmost con-
fidence is reposed, and it is chosen by districts.

New York and Mississippi have set us precedents for choosing
the judges of this court by districts. In New York the highest
court — the court of final resort — is composed of four judges chosen
by general ticket, and the balance from districts. When the con-
ventions to frame the constitutions of the states of Mississippi
and New York were in session, they approached this subject with
much caution and deliberation, and they, with great care and pru-
dence, threw around the elective judiciary the safeguard of a dis-
trict system. Appeals have been made, of a party character, to
save the state from an abolition bench. An appeal was made
here the other day, by certain northern gentlemen, to us, from
the south, to come to their aid. They have called upon us hard
money democrats of the south to come to their aid, and save them
from the control of the abolition whigs of the north. This party
spirit should not be followed, should not be permitted to enter
into the choice of judges of the supreme court. But under the
general ticket system party will rule, will control and govern the
election of the court. No matter what party may be in power at
the time of the election, it may be, as the gentleman from Mont-
gomery has said, that the Rough and Ready party will then be
dominant; but be that as it may whatever party is in power,
that party will have the whole bench under their rule. Then will

THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 1847 759

we have a party convention to nominate these judges, and their
nominations will be confirmed. We know how these conventions
are got up. We know that no man will ever be nominated by
them, except men long known as keen and wily politicians — party
leaders. Then, sir, look at the supreme court that you will have.
Not only a party bench, but one composed of politicians, elevated
there because they are such politicians, and whose decisions will
be in conformity with the views of the party elevating them. We
will then have, sir, a central power created in the state. We will
have a consolidated judicial despotism, in the shape of a supreme
court. Such will not be the case with the district system; its
power and its responsibility are divided; it looks to different inter-
ests for its support, and cannot become so dangerous. For this
district system, which is denounced as not orthodox, we have not
only the precedents of New York and Mississippi, but also of two
great leaders, Thomas H. Benton and Silas Wright, who have
advocated it, and fought for it, in the halls of Congress. They
have shown its benefits and advantages, when battling for it, as
a rule to govern congressional elections. This report of the major-
ity of the committee is a compromise report. They went out of
this Convention with a decided majority in favor of their plan,
but, to obviate all objections, they have made a compromise
report. They have yielded so far on this district system, as to
consent that the Legislature, after the first election, in case the
mode does not work well, may change the manner of election. In
this they have yielded much; as much as gentlemen should ask,
and he hoped the Convention would sustain the report throughout
all its provisions.

Mr. BOND addressed the convention in support of the major-
ity report, and

Mr. BROCKMAN in favor of the minority report and the
general ticket system.

The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, on the motion
of Mr. Dement to substitute the minority report. No. i, for the
first twelve sections, of the majority report and resulted — yeas
64, nays 84.

The report of the majority was then adopted as a substitute
for all the propositions that had been heretofore before the con-

76o ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

vention and which had been referred to the select committee; and
it was then taken up section after section.

Sec. I. The judicial power of this state shall be and is hereby
vested in one supreme court, in circuit courts, in county courts,
and in justices of the peace.

Mr. GREGG moved to add to the section:

"Provided, that inferior local courts of civil and criminal juris-
diction may be established by the general assembly, in the cities
of this state, but such courts shall have a uniform organization
and jurisdiction in such cities."

Messrs. Gregg, Williams and Peters advocated the amend-
ment; and it was adopted.

Mr. FARWELL moved to strike out all after "circuit courts"
and insert: "and such other courts of inferior jurisdiction as the
legislature, from time to time may create;" which was rejected.

And the section as amended [was] adopted.

Sec. 2. The supreme court shall consist of three judges, any
two of whom shall form a quorum; and the concurrence of two of
said judges shall in all cases be necessary to a decision.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to add thereto:

"And no person who has once been elected or appointed judge
of any court of record created or authorized by this constitution,
or by any act of the general assembly of this state after the adop-
tion thereof; or who shall have entered upon his or their official
duties or otherwise signified his or their acceptance of the office, shall
be eligible to an election or an appointment to any like office
created or authorized as aforesaid, nor shall any such person be
eligible to any other office in the gift of the people or of either
of the departments of the government of this state for the period of
two years after the expiration of the term for which he or they were
elected or appointed judge."

Mr. BOSBYSHELL moved the Convention adjourn; which
motion was negatived.

The question was then taken on Mr. Singleton's amendment,
and it was rejected — yeas 62, nays 109.

Adjourned.

LIV. FRIDAY, AUGUST 13, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Shields.

Leave of absence for eight days was granted to Mr. Bunsen,
in consequence of sickness; and often days to Mr. Knapp of Scott;
and eight days to Mr. Dunn and Mr. Kitchell.

Mr. SIM presented a petition praying an exemption of a
homestead, &c. from execution, &c ; which petition was laid on
the table.

A call of the convention was ordered, and after some time a
quorum appeared.

Mr. SPENCER asked a suspension of the rules to enable him
to offer a resolution that hereafter the afternoon sessions shall
commence at 2 p. m., and the convention refused to suspend the
rules — yeas 81, nays 49 — two-thirds not voting therefor.

The question pending at the adjournment on yesterday was
on the adoption of the 2d section of the majority report of the
special judiciary committee — and being taken was decided in the
affirmative.

Mr. BUTLER moved to postpone for the present the con-
sideration of the intervening sections, and take up the 13th sec-
tion; which motion was lost.

Sec. 3. The state shall be divided into three grand divisions,
as nearly equal as may be, and the qualified electors of each
division shall elect one of the said judges for the term of nine
years; provided, that after the first election of such judges the
legislature may have the power to provide by law for their elec-
tion by the whole state, or by divisions, as it may deem most ex-
pedient.

Mr. SERVANT moved as a substitute for the section the
following:

"The governor shall nominate, and by and with the advice
and consent of the senate, appoint the judges of the supreme court,
(two-thirds of the senators elected concurring therein.) Said
761

762 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

judges shall hold their office for the term of fifteen years, and until
their successors shall be commissioned and sworn.' '

Mr. PETERS submitted a modification to the substitute,
making the term nine years, and providing for the settlement by
lot, so that one would be appointed by the governor and senate
every three years.

This, he said, was a compromise with those who desired to
break up the old system of appointment during good behaviour.
This was a compromise between the two systems, for it reduced
the term of office — which was one feature in the old system much
complained of by the people.

Mr. SERVANT accepted the modification.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin said, that the proposition now
before them was his favorite, and he addressed the friends of a
general ticket to vote for this as far preferable to the district
system; and he also thought the friends of the district system would
find it much better than the general ticket system. He called
upon the opponents of an elective judiciary to stand by it, and
they could carry it.

Mr. GEDDES said, he knew but little of matters relative to the
judiciary, but he agreed with the gentleman from Macoupin, and
thought the old system of appointment the best. His second
choice however was not the general ticket system: he preferred
the district plan. He saw many evils in the general ticket system,
and he supposed the gentleman from Macoupin saw as many in
the district system. He would vote for the amendment.

Mr. PRATT said, this subject was a most important one. It
was one of the great reforms which this convention was called to
adopt, and where there was such a large majority in favor of the
elective judiciary, he regretted to see such difference of opinion,
and so much feeling shown on the question of the proper mode of
carrying this great reform into operation. He had long given the
subject much consideration and study, and he confessed his own
opinions were not yet satisfactorily settled. His views upon the
subject were expressed in a published article, which he read in
lieu of his own remarks.

This was his view of the subject, and much better expressed
than he could do so. He was in favor of the election of the judges

FRIDAY, AUGUST 13, 1847 763

by the whole people; but if that was voted down he would vote
for the district system in preference to the appointment by the
governor and two-thirds of the senate.

Mr. BUTLER said, he was in favor of the general ticket sys-
tem, but inasmuch as that had been voted down by the conven-
tion, he would now vote for the district system, as reported by
the majority of the committee, because it authorized the legislature
to change the mode of election to whatever plan the people may
desire. It was in his opinion a fair and honorable compromise,
and the friends of the general ticket ought to support it.

Mr. HARVEY asked for a division, so as to vote first on strik-
ing out.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean opposed the division of the question.

Mr. LOCKWOOD said that, from his peculiar position, it
would be but proper that he should define it. He did so as follows:

I believe that long terms and competent salaries are the only
sure basis of an independent, upright and able judicial system —
and I am yet to learn that the tenure of good behaviour with a
competent salary is not best calculated to secure these desirable
results. I am however satisfied that the tenure of good behav-
iour has received the condemnation of the people. I am, therefore,
for the next best plan that can be obtained to secure these objects;
I am of opinion that the amendment of the gentleman from
Randolph is the best that there is any probability of getting. I
shall therefore go for it if it can be amended so as to render the
judge ineligible. — I cannot vote for the proposition of the gentle-
man from Peoria, fearing as I do, that the short terms contained
in it and the reeligibility of the judges will produce the evils of a
dependent and time-serving judiciary.

Mr. ARMSTRONG offered the following as a substitute for
the amendment:

"The justices of the supreme court shall be elected by the
qualified voters of the state, on the first Monday of March, after
the adoption of this article; returns whereof shall be made to the
secretary of state, who shall count the same in the presence of the
governor and auditor, or either of them; the three persons having
the highest number of votes shall be elected.' '

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin, said that he hoped the

764 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

amendment would be withdrawn and that a fair opportunity
might be given to the friends of the appointment by the governor
system, to record their votes upon the journal in favor of their
plan. He thought it a want of courtesy to deny them this poor
privilege.

Messrs. KNOWLTON and WEST expressed the same views,
and hoped that a fair vote might be had.

Mr. ARMSTRONG replied, that his object was to have a
fair direct vote upon the general ticket system, and if that was
voted down, then he would vote with the friends of the old system.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall thought the district system was the
choice of the majority and would vote for that.

Mr. ARMSTRONG withdrew his amendment.

Mr. LOCKWOOD offered the following as a substitute for
the amendment:

"The judges of the supreme court shall be appointed by the
governor, by and with the advice and consent of two-thirds of all
the senators elected; and shall hold their offices for the period of
fifteen years, and until their successors are appointed and quali-
fied, and the said judges shall not be re-eligible to said office."

The question being taken thereon, it was rejected — yeas 12.

The question recurred upon the amendment first proposed and
it was rejected — yeas 38, nays 103.

Mr. ARMSTRONG renewed his amendment as a substitute
for the section.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to amend the substitute by adding
thereto— "and be forever ineligible to re-election;" which was
rejected.

Mr. PRATT moved as a substitute for the substitute the
following:

"The state shall be divided into three districts, as nearly
equal in population as may be. The justices of the supreme court
shall be elected by the qualified electors of the state, one of
whom shall be selected from, and reside in, each district;" which
was rejected — yeas 42, nays 80.

The question was taken, by yeas and nays, on the substitute
proposed by Mr. Armstrong, and it was rejected — yeas 60, nays
78.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 13, 1847 765

Mr. GEDDES offered an amendment, providing for the
appointment of the judges by the governor and a majority of the
senate, &c.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the previous question; which was
ordered.

The question was taken on the amendment and it was re-
jected.

The question recurring on the adoption of the section:

Mr. KENNER asked for a division so as to vote first on the
part preceding the proviso, and the convention, by yeas and nays,
refused to divide the question — yeas 40, nays 95.

The section was then, by yeas and nays, adopted — yeas 88,
nays 53.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved a reconsideration of the vote just
taken; and it was refused.

Sec. 4. The office of one of said judges shall be vacated after
the first election held under this article, in three years, of one in
six years, of one in nine years, to be decided by lot, so that one of
said judges shall be elected once in every three years; the judge
having the longest term to serve shall be the first chief justice,
after which the judge having the oldest commission shall be chief
justice.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out the words "three," "six"
and "nine" where they occurred and to insert in lieu thereof the
words "two," "four," and "six."

Mr. KNOWLTON offered as a substitute for two, four and
six, the words, "four," "eight" and "twelve."

The question was first taken on striking out, and was decided
in the negative.

The section was then adopted, as was also.

Sec. 5. The supreme court may have original jurisdiction in
cases relative to the revenue, in cases of mandamus, habeas corpus,
and in such cases of impeachment as may be by law directed to be
tried before it; and shall have appellate jurisdiction in all other
cases.

Sec. 6. The supreme court shall hold at least one term annu-
ally in each of the aforesaid grand divisions, at such times and
places as the general assembly shall by law direct; provided, how-

766 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ever, that the general assembly may, after the year eighteen
hundred and fifty, direct by law that the said court shall be held
at one place only.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to strike out "at one place only"
and insert "in each judicial circuit."

Mr. MINSHALL oflFered as a substitute for the amend-
ment the following:

"And provided that the legislature, after the year 1850, may
increase the number of judges to four, but after that addition, the
number of justices of the supreme court shall not be increased nor
diminished."

Mr. WITT moved to lay both on the table; which motion was
carried.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to insert before the words ' 'places,"
the words "place or;" which motion was agreed to.

Mr. HARDING moved to add to the section the words, "in
each grand division."

Mr. HURLBUT offered as a substitute therefor, to be added
to the section, "in the state."

Pending which, the convention adjourned, till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

No quorum appearing, a call of the Convention was ordered,
and, after some time, ia8 members appeared.

Mr. HARDING withdrew his amendment.

Mr. HURLBUT renewed his motion to add to the section the
words ' 'in the state;' ' and the motion was carried — yeas59, nays 54.

Mr. HARDING moved to strike out all of the section after
the word "divisions."

The question being taken thereon, by yeas and nays, was
decided in the negative — yeas 64, nays 69.

Mr. GEDDES moved to strike out "or places." Rejected.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to strike out the section, and sub-
stitute therefor the following:

"The supreme court shall hold one term annually in each of
the aforesaid grand divisions, at such time and place in each grand
division as shall be directed in this constitution, and the three
grand divisions shall be as follows: The counties of

FRIDAY, AUGUST 13, 1847 767

shall form the first division, and the supreme court shall be held
at , in the county of ," &c.

Mr. MARSHALL of Coles offered as a substitute therefor the
following: "One term of the supreme court shall be held annu-
ally in each judicial circuit, at such time and place as shall be
provided;" and the same, by yeas and nays, was rejected — yeas
47, nays 90.

Mr. HARVEY asked for a division, so as to vote first on strik-
ing out, and it was refused. The question was then taken on the
substitute of Mr. Constable, and it was rejected — yeas 63, nays
71-

Mr. ECCLES moved the previous question; which was re-
fused.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out the section; and insert:
' 'The supreme court shall be held at the seat of government once
or more in each year, at such time as the General Assembly may
direct."

Mr. HARDING offered as a substitute therefor: "The
supreme court shall hold one or more terms, annually, in but one
place in each grand division."

Mr. POWERS moved the previous question; which was
ordered.

The question was then taken on the substitute of Mr. Harding,
and it was rejected — yeas 68, nays 69.

The question being taken on Mr. Hogue's amendment, it
was rejected — yeas 40, nays 97.

The question recurring on the adoption of the section, it was
adopted — yeas 85, nays 52.

Mr. ROUNTREE moved to postpone the consideration of the
intervening sections, (relating to the circuit court) and take up
the 13th section; which motion was carried.

Sec. 13. There shall be in each county a court, to be called
a county court.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to substitute therefor the follow-
ing: "There shall be in each county in this state a county court,
to consist of one judge and two associates, who shall be elected by
the qualified voters of the county, on the same day fixed for the

768 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

election of other judicial officers, who shall hold their offices
four years, and until their successors are elected and qualified."

Mr. SINGLETON moved to substitute therefor: "There
shall be in each county in this state a county court, to be com-
posed of the justices of the peace of the several counties, and no
other tribunal shall hereafter be created for the management and
direction of such matters as may pertain to the internal regulations
of the counties. Said justices shall not be allowed any other
compensation for their services as members of said court, than
exemptions from military duty and labor upon the public high-
way. Said court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of
all cases to which the county is or may be a party, and shall exer-
cise all the powers and duties of probate court, not conferred by
law upon the circuit court, and such other jurisdiction as the Leg-
islature may confer."

Mr. ROUNTREE advocated the original section.

Mr. GRAIN said, the amendment proposed by Mr. Arm-
strong was the first section of the report of the committee on
Miscellaneous Questions, and it had been reported in obedience
to instructions passed by the Convention.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, there could be no sort of disrespect
to the committee on Miscellaneous Questions, if the Convention
preferred the report of the Judiciary committee, which he hoped
would be done.

Mr. SINGLETON addressed the Convention in support of
his amendment and in opposition to the section as reported.

Pending the question thereon —

Mr. LOGAN (by leave) offered the following resolution, which
was adopted:

Resolved. That a committee of nine — one from each judicial
circuit — be appointed to divide the state into three grand divisions,
for the election of judges of the supreme court.

2. That said committee be instructed to make said divisions
as nearly equal in population as practicable; are to make said
divisions by lines running, as nearly as may be, east and west
across the state with county lines.

3. That said committee be instructed to fix one place in each

FRIDAY, AUGUST 13, 1847 769

grand division for holding the supreme court, until otherwise
provided by law.

And Messrs. Logan, Gregg, Pratt, Peters, Harvey, Har-
lan, Caldwell, Brown, and Thomas were appointed the com-
mittee.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin, from the committee on Educa-
tion, made a report; which was read, laid on the table and 250
copies ordered to be printed.

And then the Convention adjourned.

LV. SATURDAY, AUGUST 14, 1847

The PRESIDENT having been called home, in consequence
of sickness in his family, the Convention was called to order by
Mr. RouNTREE, who moved that Mr. Z. Casey be appointed
president fro tempore; which motion was unanimously concurred
in, and

Mr. Z. CASEY took the chair.

The question pending at the adjournment yesterday, was on
the proposed substitute of Mr. Singleton for the substitute,
offered by Mr. Armstrong, for section thirteen of the report of
the majority of the select committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. SINGLETON withdrew his amendment.

Mr. ARMSTRONG modified his proposed substitute to read
as follows:

"There shall be in each county in this state a county court, to
consist of one judge and two associates, who shall be elected by
the qualified voters of the county, as shall be provided by the
General Assembly, who shall hold their offices four years and until
their successors are elected and qualified."

Mr. ARCHER moved to amend the amendment, by inserting
after the word "associates" the words: "the latter being justices
of the peace, to be drawn alternately from each precinct in the
county."

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the previous question; which was
seconded.

The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr.
Archer, and decided in the negative. \

The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. Arm-
strong, by yeas and nays, and it was rejected — yeas 46, nays 82.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the 13th sec-
tion, and it was adopted.

Sec. 14. One county judge shall be elected by the qualified
voters of each county, who shall hold his office for four years, and
until his successor is elected and qualified.
770

SATURDAY, AUGUST 14, 1847 771

Mr. WEST moved to strike out the section, and insert in lieu
thereof the following:

"There shall be established in each county in this state a
court of probate, which shall be a court of record, to consist of one
officer, who shall be elected by the qualified voters of the counties,
respectively, and be styled the judge of probate; whose compen-
sation shall be regulated by law. The courts of probate shall
have jurisdiction in matters relating to the settlement of the
estates of deceased persons, executors, administrators and guard-
ians, and such other jurisdiction as may be assigned to them by
law."

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin moved to amend the amendment
by adding to it the following:

"And the justices of the peace of the counties in this state shall
be divided into four classes, by lot; and one of said classes
shall sit with said judge of probate at each quarterly term, for the
transaction of county business; Provided, all the justices of the
peace of the counties sh^U be entitled to seats in said court, but
only the class required to sit in said court shall receive compen-
sation for their services."

And the question being taken thereon, it was rejected.

The question recurring on the amendment of Mr. West, it,
too, was rejected, by yeas and nays — yeas 25, nays 100.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the section,
and it was adopted.

Mr. SCATES moved to pass over, informally, the next three
sections, and to take up the i8th section.

The question being taken thereon, it was rejected.

Sec. 15. The jurisdiction of said court shall extend to all
matters of probate, with such other jurisdiction as the Legislature
may confer in civil cases, and such criminal cases as may be pre-
scribed by law where the punishment is by fine only, not exceeding
one hundred dollars.

Mr. ROBBINS moved to amend the section by adding: "all
pleadings in said court shall be oral."

Mr. ROBBINS modified his amendment to read as follows:
"Special pleadings in the county court in relation to matters of
probate, and in relation to county business, shall not be required."

772

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Messrs. Davis of Montgomery, Peters, Constable, Harvev
and Church opposed the amendment, and Messers. Scates,
Palmer of Macoupin and Robbins advocated it.

And the question was taken thereon, and rejected.

Mr. SHIELDS moved to amend the section by striking out all
after the word "probate," and insert instead: "and all county
business, with such other business as the Legislature may impose;"
which was rejected.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to strike out all after the word
"where," and insert: "the offence is not capital or punishable by
imprisonment in the penitentiary;" and the amendment was re-
jected.

Mr. CALDWELL moved to strike out the words "matters"
and ' 'with,' ' in the first line, and insert instead of ' 'with' ' the word
"and;" and the same was carried.

Mr. DEITZ moved to amend the section by striking out
"law;" and the motion was rejected.

Mr. FARWELL moved to add to the section; ' 'Provided, that
no lawyer shall in any case be permitted to practice in such court."

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to lay the amendment on the table.

On which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and re-
sulted— yeas 117, nays 15.

Mr. ADAMS moved the previous question.

Pending which, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

afternoon

On motion, a call of the Convention was ordered, and, after
some time, 116 members answered to their names.

The demand for the previous question being pending at the
adjournment, it was put and ordered.

The question was then put on the adoption of the 15th section,
and it was adopted — yeas 79, nays 45.

Sec. 16. The county judge, with two or more justices of the
peace, to be designated by law, shall hold terms for the transaction
of county business, and shall perform such other duties as the
General Assembly shall prescribe; Provided, the Legislature may
require that the two justices, to be chosen as may be provided by
law, shall sit with the county judge in all cases.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 14, 1847 773

Mr. SMITH of Macon moved to strike out the words "of the
peace to be designated by law," and to insert in lieu thereof, "to
be chosen in the same manner as the county judge."

The question being taken thereon by yeas and nays, it was
decided in the affirmative — yeas 68, nays 61.

Mr. JONES moved to strike out the words "or more," in
the first line.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery opposed the motion.

Mr. NORTHCOTT expressed himself in favor of the amend-
ment.

The question being taken thereon, it was carried — yeas 71,
nays 50.

Mr. SINGLETON moved to amend the section so as to read
as follows: "The county judges, consisting of the justices of the
peace, shall hold terms,' ' &c.

Mr. SINGLETON expressed himself at considerable length in
opposition to the report of the committee, and the course that had
been pursued in relation to it. He thought that other members of the
Convention had interests at heart, had the views of their constitu-
ents to be expressed, as well as the immaculate committee of
twenty-seven, who had uniformly voted against every proposition,
and opposed even the consideration of any amendment that had
been offered to their report. For one he had offered the amend-
ments which he considered as carrying out the views of his con-
stituents, though he knew that it was useless to attempt to carry
them. He and many others who were anxious to present the
sentiments of their constituents had been voted down and cut off
by the majority, who seemed determined to carry the report
through without time for consideration, or an opportunity to
amend. He felt certain that so far as he was concerned, his con-
stituents would not adopt the report in this particular, and that
he would not vote for the constitution with these provisions in
it.

The question was taken on the adoption of Mr. Singleton's
amendment, and it was rejected.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to insert after ' 'busi-
ness," in the 2d line, the words "and as many more justices of the
peace as may be designated by law."

774 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

And the question being taken, the amendment was rejected.

Mr. BROWN moved to strike out the proviso at the end of
the section. The question being taken, resulted yeas 65, nays 39;
no quorum voting.

Mr. VANCE demanded the yeas and nays, which were ordered,
and resulted — yeas 102, nays 22.

Mr. SHIELDS moved the previous question, which was
seconded.

The section now stood as follows:

Sec. 16. The county judge, with two justices to be chosen
in the same manner as the county judge, shall hold terms for the
transaction of county business, and shall perform such other
duties as the General Assembly shall prescribe.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the adoption
thereof, and it was decided in the affirmative — yeas 80, nays 48.

Mr. WEAD moved to reconsider the vote just taken.

Mr. MANLY opposed the motion to reconsider, because the
gentleman from Fulton had a scheme of uniting the probate,
circuit and district courts.

Mr. LOGAN hoped the motion to reconsider would prevail.

Mr. TURNBULL moved the Convention adjourn; which
motion was rejected.

The question being taken on reconsidering, it was decided in
the negative — yeas 45, nays 63.

Mr. SCATES (by leave) offered the following resolution;
which was adopted:

Resolved, That a select committee of one from each judicial
circuit be appointed with instructions to report a schedule pro-
viding for the time and manner of submitting the constitution
to be voted upon by the people, and also such provisions as may
be necessary, in case of its adoption, for organizing and adjusting
the government under its provisions.

Messrs. Scates, Servant, Manly, Dummer, Thornton,
Henderson, Stadden, Archer, and Harper were appointed the
committee.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned.

LVI. MONDAY, AUGUST i6, 1847

Mr. SCATES moved a suspension of the rules to enable him
to offer the following resolution; and the rules were suspended.

Resolved, That thousand copies of the constitution

and schedule, as revised and amended, be printed and distributed
according to population to the several counties, for the use of the
people.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to fill the blank with 20,000.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to fill the blank with 50,000.

Mr. ROBBINS proposed 80,000; lost, and 50,000 was inserted,
and the resolution was passed.

Leave of absence for four days was granted to Messrs. De-
ment and Cross of Woodford.

Mr. SHERMAN, (by leave) from the committee on Finance,
made a report, which was read, laid on the table, and 250 copies
ordered to be printed.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to suspend the rules to enable him
to offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That a committee of one from each judicial circuit
of the state be appointed to prepare an address, to be submitted
to the people of this state in connection with the proposed con-
stitution.

The rules were suspended, and the resolution was adopted —
yeas 80, nays 55.

And Messrs. Constable, Davis of Massac, Dale, Marshall
of Mason, Wead, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Dawson, Knowlton,
and Ballingall were appointed the committee.

Mr. WEAD presented a petition from sundry citizens of
Fulton county, praying a prohibitory clause in the new consti-
tution against banks and banking; which was read.

Mr. WEAD moved that it be referred to a select committee
of nine.

Mr. ADAMS moved it be referred to the committee on Banks
and Corporations.

775

776 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. ARMSTRONG asked if there were any such committee?

The PRESIDENT said there was not.

Mr. McCALLEN moved its reference to the committee on
Incorporations.

Mr. WEAD said, that he desired that this petition should re-
ceive a respectful hearing, and as the committee on Incorporations
had expired, he hoped the subject would be referred to a com-
mittee favorable to its object, and that a report on the subject
might be had.

Mr. HARVEY informed the gentleman from Fulton that the
committee on Incorporations had not expired, nor had any mem-
ber of it expired. — The committee, however, were as little anxious
to have the subject referred to them as was the gentleman from
FultjOn to refer to it.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin hoped the subject would not be
referred to the committee on Incorporations. They had reported
their views on the subject, and the Convention had shown its
opinion of that report by rejecting it. The subject now came
up on a petition from certain citizens of Fulton county, and they
should be respectfully heard, and it ought to be referred to a select
committee favorable to its object.

Mr. McCALLEN hoped this question would be referred to
the committee on Incorporations, because that was the proper
committee to examine into the matter. He hoped that the Con-
vention would not again be occupied with this exciting subject.
Already days had been wasted in fruitless endeavors, by its friends,
to carry it through, and the Convention had over and over voted
it down by decisive majorities. He earnestly hoped the balance
of the session would not be disturbed by the subject.

Mr. CALDWELL said, that he hoped the petition would not
be referred to the committee on Incorporations. That committee
had already reported to the Convention its opinion on the subject,
and that opinion was adverse to the objects of the petitioners.
He said this subject had been before them on former occasions,
but never fairly. The opponents of a prohibitory clause would
not allow it to be presented in a proper shape; and it would be per-
sisted in by its friends till it did have a proper hearing. He had
said so before, and said so now, that he would present the subject

MONDAY, AUGUST i6, 1847 nil

to the Convention every time an opportunity was afForded. —
Moreover, he informed gentlemen of all parties that the whole
people of the south and thousands at the north would vote against
any constitution which did not allow them in some way to express
their sentiments of condemnation and opposition against banks.
He hoped the petition would be referred to a select committee,
from whom we can have a report that will present the question in
a proper shape.

Mr. NORTHCOTT said, that he was in favor of referring the
subject to a select committee. The gentleman from Fulton had
a great desire to be chairman of a committee, and had been at home,
among his constituents, for a week or more. During which time
he had, no doubt, gone to considerable trouble to get up this
petition, and it would certainly be mortifying to the gentleman,
after all this, to be denied the satisfaction of a select committee.

Mr. WEAD rose to address the Convention, when he was
called to order.

Mr. W. said, that no member with any proper regard for him-
self, as a member of the Convention, would attribute to him any
impure or dishonest motives, and then attempt to choke him off
in his reply.

Mr. McCALLEN inquired if the gentleman had not spoken
once? If so, why was he allowed to proceed? He had been
choked off under the rules several times.

The PRESIDENT said the gentleman could explain.

Mr. WEAD said, he only desired to explain. He merely
wished to say to the member from Menard, that any man who
attributed to him any motive or conduct in presenting this petition
other than honorable and patriotic, he was sadly mistaken; and
before any person made any such accusation as had been made by
the member from Menard, he ought to be, at least, prepared to
prove it. So far as this petition was concerned, he had nothing to
do with getting it up, and knew nothing of it till it was handed
to him to present.

The petition was then referred to the select committee of nine.

And Messrs. Wead, Bosbyshell, Z. Casey, Williams, Smith
of Gallatin, Stadden, Campbell of Jo Daviess, Davis of Mont-
gomery, and Cross of Winnebago were appointed the committee.

778 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The Convention then took up the report of the committee on

THE JUDICIARY

Mr. ROUNTREE offered as an additional section to be in-
serted after the i6th section, the following:

"The General Assembly may provide by law, that a certain
number of the other justices of the peace of the respective counties,
to be designated by law, may sit as members of said court, upon
such occasions, at such terms as may be prescribed by law; who
shall receive no pecuniary compensation for such service, but may
be exempted from road labor, and such other duties as by law
may be specified."

Mr. WITT offered a substitute therefor.

Mr. DAWSON enquired if a motion to reconsider the whole
action of the Convention upon the subject of a county court,
would be in order?

The PRESIDENT said it could not be done by one vote, but
each vote would have to be reconsidered separately.

Mr. MARKLEY reminded the Chair that a vote had been
taken on a motion to reconsider the adoption of the sixteenth sec-
tion, and it was refused.

The PRESIDENT said, the motion to reconsider was, there-
fore out of order.

Mr. ROUNTREE then withdrew his proposed section.

Section 17 was read —

"Sec. 17. There shall be elected biennially, in each county, a
clerk of the county court, who shall be ex officio recorder, whose
compensation shall be fees."

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to amend the same by prefixing
thereto the following:

"The county judge, with such justices of the peace, in each
county, as may be designated by law, shall hold terms for the
transaction of county business, and shall perform such other
duties as the General Assembly shall prescribe; Provided,
the Legislature may require that two justices, to be chosen by
the qualified electors of each county, shall sit with the county
judge in all cases;" and to strike out "biennially," and insert
"quadrennially" in lieu thereof.

MONDAY, AUGUST i6, 1847 779

Mr. CONSTABLE advocated his amendment. It contained
tiie views of the Convention expressed, on Saturday morning, by-
several votes.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery was in hopes the amendment
would be adopted.

Mr. ARMSTRONG opposed the amendment. The Conven-
tion, on Saturday afternoon, by a vote of 80 to 45, had settled the
subject, and he hoped the little time now left before the adjourn-
ment would not be consumed in reconsidering questions which had
been decided by the Convention.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison explained his course in relation
to the subject of the judiciary. He said, that his object and
motive in moving the subject of the judiciary be referred to the
select committee, was owing to the peculiar circumstances of
the time, and the great dissatisfaction shown at the action upon the
subject in the committee of the whole; and in the hope of bringing
about a compromise that would be acceptable to a majority of the
Convention. His own views were in favor of the appointment
of the judiciary by the Governor and Senate. He had compro-
mised his own views in order to bring about concession and harmony,
and he regretted the statement that the reference of the subject
to a select committee had been the cause of the delay, and the con-
sumption of more than two weeks of the time of the Convention.

Mr. WHITNEY expressed himself in favor of the amendment,
and disclaimed any intention to practice demagogueism in sup-
porting an amendment that supposed all classes of the people
competent to perform the duties of judges.

Mr. SCATES explained, that he had no intention to impute
unkind motives to the gentleman from Madison when he stated
that much time had been lost by the reference to the com-
mittee. Such was, in his opinion, the fact, but he had no intention
to impugn the gentleman's motives.

Mr. WITT offered a substitute for the amendment; which
was laid on the table — yeas 73, nays 42.

Mr. AKIN moved the previous question; which was ordered.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the amend-
ment of Mr. Constable, by yeas and nays, and decided in the
affirmative — yeas 80, nays 59.

78o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The question recurring on the adoption of the section as
amended,

Mr. HAYES asked for a division, so as to vote upon the latter
part of the section separately.

Mr. CONSTABLE objected, and the call for a division was
withdrawn.

The question then recurred on the adoption of the 17 th sec-
tion, as amended; was taken by yeas and nays, and it was decided
in the affirmative — yeas 79, nays 55.

Mr. ARMSTRONG offered as an additional section :

"The General Assembly shall have power to reorganize the
county court, provided for in this article, and vest its jurisdiction
in one or more tribunals, to consist of such officer or officers as
shall be provided by law."

Mr. HARVEY hoped it would be adopted. Under the present
state of the report, there could be no possible tribunal for business
in the county except by this one county court. This court would
have civil and criminal jurisdiction, probate and county business.
No such court was ever heard of before. On one side would be
the widow and orphan, on the other a petition for a road. Widows
and orphans, roads and small crimes all commingled into one
tribunal and to be tried by one judge and two justices of the peace.
This was an experiment and before gentlemen went so far in the
reform it would be wise to pause and consider the extent of their
reform. He hoped the amendment would be adopted and then
the Legislature could change the organization of the court if desir-
able.

Mr. CALDWELL replied that the gentleman from Knox was
mistaken in his view of the case. The justices of the peace were
only to be associated with the county judge in county business;
and it gave the Legislature the power to provide that there should
be two justices elected to sit with him in all cases.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that in respect to the matter
complained of by the gentleman from Knox, the report stood just
as it did before, when that member was in favor of it.

Mr. FARWELL thought that there could be no objection to
the plan proposed by the gentleman from LaSalle. There was
so much difference of opinion here upon the subject of a county

MONDAY, AUGUST i6, 1847 781

court, scarcely any two members concurring upon the best mode,
that it was impossible for us to frame any system that would be
satisfactory to the people.— He thought it best to leave the sub-
ject to the Legislature to provide such courts, as the people de-
sired.

Mr. CONSTABLE opposed the proposition of the gentleman
from LaSalle, it was nothing more than throwing open the doors
of the Legislature, to change and increase the number of tribunals
in the counties. This was one evil which the constitutional pro-
vision was intended to prevent; and one which the people de-
manded of us. The present system was a very bad one, and why
did not the Legislature change it — they have the power?

Mr. DAVIS of McLean opposed the section of the gentleman
from LaSalle, and explained the county court as it now stood
organized by this report.

Mr. WEST offered the following as a substitute for the pro-
posed section:

' 'That in all cases, where the population in a county according
to the census of the county as last taken, shall exceed 10,000 in-
habitants, the office of recorder shall be a separate and distinct
office.' '

Mr. HARVEY was in favor of the substitute as a separate
section, because it would defeat the amendment of the gentleman
from LaSalle. He had never misstated the county court as it
presented itself at present under the report. The system pro-
posed was a transcript of the New York constitution, and he
feared we were getting more of that constitution in our own than
would be acceptable to the people of Illinois. The county court
now was this: that, as had been said, the best lawyer in the county
was to be county judge. That he was to have jurisdiction over
all probate matters, all county matters, all criminal matters, and
some civil matters. Was any such court ever heard of before ? It
was true that in county matters he was to have the assistance of
two justices of the peace, and also, in probate matters, he was to
be aided by two justices of the peace, to be chosen — no one knows
how. But the grand feature was, that he might, upon general
subjects, have the aid and assistance of fifty justices of the peace.
If the "best lawyer in the county" was to be enlightened by the

(

782 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

aid and consultation of fifty justices of the peace, he could not
see how it was to be done. This last feature was not, however,
taken from the constitution of the state of New York, but it was
apparently the intention to make a constitution for the state of
Illinois, made up by patches and shreds taken from other consti-
tutions. There seemed to be a sort of hydrophobia fear on the
part of gentlemen to give the Legislature any power upon this
subject. The Convention should not suppose that they were
superior in intellect or virtue to any body that would hereafter be
assembled in this state, and those who were in favor of this county
court system, as proposed by the committee, ought to be satisfied
with having it fixed in the constitution, and in case it was found
to work badly, let them leave with the Legislature the power to
change it to another. They ought to be satisfied with having
the honor to be styled the fathers of this system, in case it worked
well; but if it was found to be unsatisfactory, they ought to give
the Legislature power to change it.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean replied to the gentleman from Knox,
by reminding him that in the circuit court, to which an appeal
could be taken from the county commissioners' court, there were
often tried a case of probate, of a road, a criminal case, a civil case,
and a bill in chancery, all in one day, and all his ridicule was cer-
tainly not more applicable to the county court than to the present
circuit court. The gentleman need not have gone farther than
the circuit court, in Knox county, to have known this.

Mr. WEAD opposed, at much length, the whole report of the
majority of the select committee, and particularly the county
court system.

Mr. LOGAN replied and defended the committee.

Mr. HURLBUT rose, but gave way to a motion to adjourn.

And the convention adjourned till i p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. HURLBUT replied to the member from Fulton, and de-
fended the majority of the select committee.

Mr. ARMSTRONG was in favor of the substitute of Mr.
West, and would vote for it as a separate section, but it had been
offered as a substitute for his own amendment, which he deemed

MONDAY, AUGUST i6, 1847 783

of great importance. He considered that the matter should be
tested, and that, if the people should become dissatisfied with
their so much extolled county court system, it might be changed.
It was an insult to the intelligence of the people, to pretend that
there would be no men ever chosen to the Legislature hereafter,
who had not equal virtue and intelligence with any in the Con-
vention. He hoped the matter would be left in the power of the
Legislature to change the system, in case it was not satisfactory to
them. He had nothing to say concerning the actions of the com-
mittee or of their midnight proceedings. He would merely say
that he was not a member of the committee, and he was glad he
was not, for he would be very unwilling to have this report, so far
as it relates to the county court system, go forth as a production
of his. Mr. A. then pointed out the defects in the system which
he thought would not be acceptable to the people.

Mr. WILLIAMS replied to the several gentlemen who had
spoken of the action of the majority of the select committee —
particularly to the remarks of Messrs. Harvey, Wead and Arm-
strong.

Mr. SHIELDS moved the previous question; which was
seconded.

The question being taken by yeas and nays upon the substitute
proposed by Mr. West, it was rejected — yeas 45, nays 94.

The question recurred upon the proposed section of Mr.
Armstrong, and being taken by yeas and nays, was decided in
the negative — yeas 64, nays 74.

Mr. POWERS offered the substitute proposed by Mr. West
(modified so as to read 12,000 inhabitants) as an additional sec-
tion.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell moved to strike out "12,000" and
insert "8,000."

And the question was taken on striking out, and resulted —
yeas 60, nays 46. No quorum voting.

Mr. KNOWI^TON demanded the yeas and nays; which were
ordered, and the motion was carried — yeas 78, nays 58.

Mr.^MARSHALL of Coles moved to insert 15,000.

Mr. SMITH "of Macon proposed 1,000.

Mr. JENKINS proposed 3,000.

784 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. ECCLES moved to lay the whole subject on the table, on
which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted — yeas
43, nays 89.

Mr. WITT proposed 5,000.

The question was taken on filling the blank with 15,000, re-
jected.

On filling the blank with 10,000 — 48 yeas. Lost.

Mr. THORNTON proposed 14,000 — 54 yeas, 68 nays.

Mr. McCALLEN proposed 9,999 — 32 yeas. Lost.

Mr. MARSHALL moved the previous question — which was
seconded.

The question was put on inserting 9,000, and rejected.

On inserting 8,000 — yeas 64, nays 70. Lost.

On inserting 5,000, the yeas and nays were ordered and de-
cided in the negative — yeas 61, nays 79.

The question was put on 3,000 and rejected.

On inserting 1,000, the yeas and nays were ordered and re-
sulted— yeas 45, nays 90.

So the convention refused to insert any number in the blank.

The question was taken on the adoption of the section and it
was rejected — yeas 32.

Mr. LOGAN offered as an additional section:

"The Legislature may by law make the clerk of the circuit
court, ex-officio, recorder, in lieu of the county clerk."

Mr. ARMSTRONG offered the following to be added thereto:

"Provided, that in any county, where the inhabitants shall
exceed 4,000, the office of recorder shall be elective by the qualified
voters of said county.' '

Mr. HARVEY supported the proviso, and replied with much
severity to the remarks of the gentleman from Adams — delivered
earlier in the afternoon.

Mr. WOODSON moved the previous question, which was
seconded.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the proviso, and
it was rejected — yeas 50, nays 85.

And then the question was taken on the section as proposed
by Mr. Logan, by yeas and nays, and the same was carried — yeas
77, nays 55.

MONDAY, AUGUST i6, 1847 785

Mr. DAWSON offered an additional section.

Mr. SCATES offered as a substitute therefor, the following:

' 'The legislature shall fix a fee bill for the several officers of this
state, whose compensation shall consist of fees for services ren-
dered, and the several county courts shall have power to reduce
the rates of fees accruing to any officer in the county, by a certain
per cent., when, in their opinion, such fees yield more than ade-
quate pay for the services rendered;" upon which the yeas and
nays were ordered; and the same was rejected — yeas 45, nays 80.

The question recurred upon Mr. Dawson's proposed additional
section, and it was rejected — yeas 14, nays 104.

Mr. HURLBUT offered the following as an additional section:

"The legislature may pass a general law authorizing township
organization, in all counties in which a majority of the legal
voters may at any general election vote for such township organ-
ization; and when such township organization shall be established
in any county, then the county court hereinbefore provided shall
cease to transact county business in such county."

And the question being taken thereon, it was adopted— yeas
92, nays not counted.

Sec. 18. The general assembly shall provide for the com-
pensation of the county judge.

Mr. MARKLEY offered a substitute for the section, which
was rejected; he then moved it be added to the section, and it was
rejected.

The section was then adopted.

Sec. 19. There shall be elected in each county in this state,
by the qualified electors thereof, a competent number of justices
of the peace, who shall hold their office for the term of four years,
and until their successors shall be elected and qualified, and who
shall perform such duties, receive such compensation, and exercise
such jurisdiction (not exceeding one hundred dollars) as may be
prescribed by law.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to strike out the words
' 'not exceeding one hundred dollars.' '

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau and Mr. WHITNEY advocated the
amendment. The latter gentleman said that there was not a man
in his county, but was in favor of extending the jurisdiction of the

786 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

justices of the peace. The people there were unanimously in favor
of giving the justices of the peace jurisdiction to a larger amount
than one hundred dollars, and he felt himself unanimously in-
structed by his constituents to vote for the amendment. It was
a subject of universal complaint there, and he felt himself bound
to carry it out.

Mr. HURLBUT said, he felt himself obliged to say a word or
two, after what had fallen from his colleague. He would vote
against the amendment because he believed one hundred dollars
high enough for justices to exercise jurisdiction over. Moreover
he did not know, until he heard it here, that the people of his
country were unanimously in favor of it, or that they had in-
structed their representatives to vote for it. This might be so
but he had never heard of it.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL moved to adjourn till to-morrow at 8
a. m.

Mr. KNOWLTON proposed 6 a. m.

Mr. CONSTABLE proposed 5 a. m.

Mr. AKIN proposed 7 p. m. to-day.

And the convention adjourned till 8 a. m. to-morrow.

LVII. TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1847

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon presented a petition on the sub-
ject of education. Laid on the table.

Mr. HENDERSON presented a petition from sundry citizens
of Will county, praying a prohibition of slavery. Referred to the
committee on Bill of Rights.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL presented a petition from sundry citizens
of Calhoun county, praying that a residence of six months in a
county shall be required before voting; and moved to lay it on the
table.

The motion was lost, and the petition was referred to the com-
mittee on Elections.

Mr. BALLINGALL said, that he had heard his name an-
nounced as a member of the committee to draft an address to the
people on the new constitution, and asked to be excused from
serving on that committee, because he did not, even by implica-
tion, desire to be considered as favoring the new constitution, so
far as it had been adopted.

THE JUDICIARY

The question pending on the adjournment yesterday was on
the motion to strike out the words "not exceeding one hundred
dollars," in the 19th section.

Mr. SCATES replied to Mr. Whitney on the expediency of
destroying all the technicalities of the practice of the law. He
agreed with the gentleman, and in the spirit of the report of the
Law Reform committee, would go farther, and would reform the
language and technicalities of the medical profession. He cited
several medical cases coming under his personal observation,
where technicalities were discarded by the medical attendants,
and the cases resulted happily — one of the patients dying.

Mr. CONSTABLE said that he regretted much the course which
this debate had taken. The character of the Convention would
be highly elevated by the speech of the gentleman from Boone,
787

788 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

which was a most successful effort of Buncombe and nonsense, if
the standard of character adopted by the gentleman was con-
sidered a true one. The speech of the gentleman from Jefferson
this morning, so far as decency and propriety were concerned, was
in keeping with the other.

Mr. C. opposed the amendment proposed. He considered
that the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace over the sum of
one hundred dollars was high enough, but in anyway he desired
to have the jurisdiction fixed in the constitution, and the subject
not left open to legislation. At the last Legislature over twenty
thousand dollars was expended in time wasted by that body in
legislating upon the subject of extending the jurisdiction of justices
of the peace from the sum of one hundred to two hundred dollars.

Mr. WITT moved to amend the motion to strike out by adding
to it — to insert "three hundred dollars."

Mr. DALE said, that he was in favor of the amendment to
strike out the clause, which hmited the jurisdiction of justices of
the peace to one hundred dollars, not that he wished the Con-
vention to increase the justices jurisdiction, but that he wished
the jurisdiction to be left open for the Legislature to increase or
diminish hereafter, as occasion might require.

This Convention had pursued a course, in relation to the
judiciary, different from that to be found in the constitutions of
most of the states. Instead of establishing by the constitution
the higher tribunals only, and leaving to the Legislature the estab-
lishing of inferior courts, as occasion and circumstances might call
for them, this convention had established and determined every
court that should exist in the state. Therefore appeared the
necessity of leaving some latitude to the Legislature to fix the
powers of these courts, and to alter those powers as the exigencies
of the state might require. This latitude should particularly be
left in the case of justices; for from indications their courts were
growing in favor with the people, at the last session of the
Legislature a majority in the popular branch having cast their
votes to enlarge the jurisdiction of justices. In some respects the
justices' court has advantages over all other courts. It is a court
always open. It is a court in which justice is administered with
less cost to suitors than in any other, and this is a consideration of

TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1847 789

some importance. He differed widely from the gentleman from
Wabash who had no sympathy for suitors. He had. For he
bore in mind how often men were drawn into court against their
wills, and when thus forced to defend themselves, he wished them
to have the power to do it without being ruined by the expenses
attendant on it. As to this matter of expense, the difference was
marked between these two courts, the circuit and justices'. In
the circuit court every cause must await its turn. The time when
a case may be reached is uncertain. Suitors with a train of wit-
nesses are, on that account, frequently kept for an entire week in
anxious attendance, at much expense, and at great waste of time.
In the justices' court, on the contrary, the day and hour of trial
is fixed, and at the time fixed the case is taken up, and, unless for
cause is disposed of without delay or loss of time. In the
justices' court the merits of a case are developed and justice
attained with as much and oftentimes more certainty than in the
circuit court. The justice may determine the case or parties
may have arbitrators or jurors as in the circuit court. In the
circuit court, a case being entered upon, must be disposed of, there
is no continuance allowed and if a suitor has neglected or omitted
a link in the chain of his evidence he may suffer gross injustice and
damage, whilst in the justices' court, the justice, anxious to attain
the merits of a case, will continue the cause, after entered into, till
each party shall have furnished all his evidence and the case be
fully and fairly presented. And thus more exact justice may be
done in this court, though not done according to strict legal rules.
If the justices' court possess these advantages over other
courts, the Convention should hesitate before [so] limiting its
jurisdiction that it could not be extended in the future if necessary.
There were cases over which its jurisdiction might safely now be
extended. If neighbors have difficulties in their settlements in-
volving the matter of several hundred dollars, and agree, in writ-
ing, to refer the matter to a justice, there was no just cause why
the justice should not determine it, enter up the judgment and,
if necessary, by fixing a transcript, make it the judgment of the
circuit court. So if a debter is willing to acknowledge in writing
before a justice a judgment to his creditor for a like amount, he
could see no reason why he should not have the power so to do, and

790 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the parties be saved the numerous expenses attendant on a suit
in the circuit court, and what was of equal or more importance,
the delay be avoided which might be of some five, six, or seven
months till the holding of a term of the circuit court.

He had not that distrust of the Legislature which some mem-
bers exhibited. He believed that, as a general matter, legislators
reflected the will of their constituents, and if the defining of the
powers of justices were entrusted to them there would be little
fear of its abuse. So long accustomed to see this a court of lim-
ited jurisdiction they would be slow to extend its powers. They
would extend them only when it was found preferable to other
existing systems, and when, on that account, the extension of its
jurisdiction was demanded by the people.

Mr. WHITNEY replied to Mr. Scates, and traveled over the
same medical cases cited by that gentleman. He repeated
his views as expressed yesterday, in support of the motion, and
urged that he was unanimously instructed to do so.

Mr. HAYES said, he agreed with the gentleman from Wabash,
that the jurisdiction now was large enough, but would vote for
any sum to be fixed permanently in the constitution, to prevent
future legislation. He repelled the indirect sneering thrown upon
the report of the committee on Law Reform, by the member from
JeflPerson. He informed that gentleman that the reforms con-
tained in the report of that committee had received the support
and sanction of the ablest jurists of the country. He challenged
him to meet that report fairly and directly when it came up before
the Convention for consideration.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin considered that the jurisdiction
of the justices of the peace should be limited in the constitution,
and the subject not left open to legislation. It had at every
session been a source of much delay and loss of time by consider-
ing applications for its extension. He thought one hundred
dollars sufficient. He could see no benefit to the people in en-
larging it; litigation would be increased, and persons having
claims of any important amount rejected would always appeal to
the circuit court, and the expenses of such suits would always be
greater than if the suit was originally entered in the circuit court.
He pointed out several instances where large sums based upon

TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1847 791

•good and legal grounds were lost to poor men, in consequence of
the ignorance and mistakes of justices of the peace.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, he was opposed to strik-
ing out, and opposed to inserting three hundred dollars, and would
be in favor of reducing the jurisdiction of justices of the peace to
fifty dollars. He agreed with the gentleman from Wabash, and
it would strike any man who had been an observer of the proceed-
ings of the last Legislature, that this subject should not be left
open to legislation, to be called up at any time by some member
elected exclusively upon this question. How many days did you
sit here at the last session of the Legislature listening to a pro-
tracted debate upon the question of extending the jurisdiction of
justices of the peace? And, after all, the subject was left as it was
before. This would always be the case. He did not agree with
the gentleman that it would be economical to the people to raise
the jurisdiction of the justices. What man who had a claim of
two or three hundred dollars and who was defeated in a lower
court, and was informed by a lawyer, that the decision would be
reversed, would not take an appeal to a higher court? Litigation
would be increased by an enlargement of the jurisdiction of jus-
tices of the peace. Appeals would multiply, and lawyers' fees and
business would increase. He could see no advantage to the
people by increasing the jursidiction, but he saw that the lower it
was reduced the cheaper it would be to the people. For then
they would institute suits which were of any importance in the
circuit court, and they would be tried by judges in whose com-
petency and judgment the people had confidence, and with whose
decision they would rest satisfied. He thought this was so evident
that every man could see it. As to the lawyers, there was not one
whose business and profits would not be increased by the extension
of the jurisdiction of the justices. Cases would increase, appeals
multiply, and consequently their fees would be more numerous.

As to the debate going on at the other end of the hall he had
nothing to say, except that he was opposed to destroying the
technicalities of the law; he was opposed to striking down the great
fabric of the common law, which has been the pride and glory of
the world for ages. He was opposed to striking away the foun-
dation of human liberty — the great and glorious common law — for

792 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

when once shaken, once disturbed, the fabric will fall. He had
no desire to prejudice the report of the committee on Law Reform.
When that subject should come properly before them he, perhaps,
would say something about it; the report was creditable to its
author, as it would be creditable to any one, but he did not think
the reform was proper. It was much easier to destroy than to
build up, and in this question it would be found true.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey replied to Mr. Scates, and defended
the medical faculty, alluding severely to the nature and character
of that gentleman's remarks.

Mr. SCATES disclaimed any intention to attack the medical
profession.

Mr. KNAPP asked him to request the reporters not to publish
certain portions of his speech.

Mr. SCATES said, he would not do so; every thing he had
said had been matter of evidence in a court of justice, and he
would take none of it back. He would also state that there was
no fear of his speeches being published; the reporters never re-
ported him. He had made no arrangements with them for that
purpose.

The question was then taken on striking out "one hundred,"
and decided in the affirmative — yeas 79, nays 65.

The question was then taken on inserting "three hundred,"
and rejected — yeas 51, nays 57.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac moved to insert "two hundred;" on
which the yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted — yeas 11,
nays 73.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell proposed "I50."

Mr. DAVIS of McLean proposed "^150."

Mr. DEITZ proposed "$400." Lost.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on inserting "$150,"
and decided in the negative.

Mr. ROBBINS proposed ' '^500.' ' Withdrawn.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL proposed "?iio."

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to reconsider the vote striking out
"one hundred;" and the Convention refused to reconsider — yeas
55, nays 81.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1847 793

The question was then taken on inserting "$50" and "$ioo,"
and they were rejected.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to reconsider the vote rejecting
"|2oo;" and the Convention refused to reconsider.

The question recurred on striking out the words "not exceed-
ing hundred dollars;" the yeas and nays were ordered

thereon, and resulted — yeas 103, nays 29.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to insert after the word
"state," in the first line, the words, "in such districts as the
Legislature may direct;" upon which motion the yeas and nays
were ordered, and resulted — yeas 123, nays 7.

Mr. WOODSON moved to strike out the section, and offered
a substitute, but subsequently withdrew it.

Mr. GRAHAM offered a substitute for the section as amended,
and it was rejected. The section was then adopted.

Sec. 20. There shall be elected, by the qualified electors of
this state, one attorney general, who shall hold his office for the
term of four years, and until his successor shall be commissioned
and qualified. He shall perform such duties and receive such
compensation as may be prescribed by law.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to strike out the section. The
office, said he, under the judicial system adopted by the Conven-
tion, was unnecessary. Under that system the circuit attorney
for the state in that district where the seat of government may
be, can be appointed the constitutional adviser of the Governor,
and the state's prosecuting attorneys in the several circuits might
be required, by the Legislature, to follow their cases up to the
supreme court in their districts.

The question being taken, the section was stricken out.

Sec. 21. There shall be elected in each of the judicial circuits
of this state, by the qualified electors thereof, one prosecuting
attorney, who shall hold his office for the term of four years, and
until his successor shall be commissioned and qualified, who shall
perform such duties and receive such compensation as may be
prescribed by law.

Mr. ARCHER moved to add thereto: "Provided, that the
Legislature may hereafter provide by law for the election, by the
qualified voters of each county in this state, of one prosecuting

794 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

attorney for each county, in lieu of the circuit attorneys provided
for in this section. The term of office, duties and compensation
of which county attorneys shall be regulated by law."

He said this officer was necessary, as the duty of these pros-
ecuting attorneys would be to represent and attend to the interests
of the people in each county, and they are particularly required
at the examining courts. There, when a man is arrested on
any criminal charge, there is no person near to attend to the
interests of the people. In case the criminal is called upon to
enter into recognizance, there is no one there to represent the
people, and secure sufficient bail to require his appearance at
court, and thus many criminals were suffered to escape for the
mere want of such an officer.

On motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. LEMON moved a call of the Convention; which was
ordered. When a quorum appeared,

Mr. JACKSON moved a suspension of the rules, to enable him
to offer a resolution; which motion was withdrawn.

The question pending at the adjournment was on the amend-
ment offered by Mr. Archer.

Mr. PRATT said, that every one, he thought, should see the
necessity of a prosecuting attorney in each county of the state,
and that the salary for the office should be sufficient to command
the best talent. The salary of three or four hundred dollars for a
circuit attorney, for a man who is to travel around the circuit, be
absent from home for some time, and attend to the business of the
state, has not been a sufficient remuneration. And all will admit
the truth of the fact, that the men of talent who have taken the
office of circuit attorney in the state, have done so, not so much
for the salary or the service to the people, but for the purpose of
making it a stepping stone to higher offices — to judgeships, or to
Congress. This, sir, has been the fact, at least it has in the county
of Jo Daviess. — Again, an acquaintance in the county is absolutely
necessary to a faithful and efficient discharge of the duties of a
prosecuting attorney. The circuit attorneys cannot have that
necessary acquaintance with the people, their morals, the state of

TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1847 795

society, and the character of the parties concerned in the case.
In many cases a nolle prosequi had been entered where, if the pros-
ecutor had been acquainted with the circumstances, with the
prosecuted, and the witnesses, this course would have been resisted,
and criminals would have been brought to justice. When crim-
inals were arrested they were generally carried before the examin-
ing court, where the feelings of the people, and the witnesses and
friends of the party were all in favor of the accused, and there was
no party present to attend to the interests of the people — to bring
the party to trial.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall opposed the amendment. A
county attorney would have too much sympathy for the people
in the county, to become an efficient officer.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean thought that a circuit attorney — a
talented one — would be much better than county attorneys.

Mr. BROCKMAN was in favor of the amendment. In his
portion of the country, of late, the district attorneys did not, it
seemed, think it worth their time to come there, and the court
generally selected some of the lawyers to act. If this was to be
the case, the people may as well have the privilege of electing one.

The question being taken by yeas and nays on the amendment,
it was adopted— yeas 77, nays 61.

Mr. THOMAS opposed the section as amended, and hoped
it would not be adopted.

Mr. ARCHER replied, and urged, again, the necessity that
would arise hereafter, in consequence of the great increase of popu-
lation and business, for these county prosecutors.

Mr. KNOWLTON opposed the section. He was in favor of
the circuit attorneys. It may have been the case that no good
ones had ever been appointed to the Jo Daviess circuit, but such
was not generally the fact. They had had very competent men
in his circuit. He considered that none, but young practitioners,
or old ones, not qualified either by education or talent to know
their profession, could be induced to take the office of county pros-
ecutor at the salary of one hundred dollars; and in such case the
state would never be able to convict, particularly with the talent
of the bar in the defence.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, he had examined the section,

796 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

and could see no harm in it. It did not propose that the very next
Legislature should provide for the election of a prosecutor in each
county, but that, when the population of the counties require it,
they would then appoint them in case they were necessary. It
was only giving the Legislature power to meet the wants of the
people. He had never known any very distinguished talent filling
the office of circuit attorney, none but what as good would be
found for the office of county prosecutor. The office was gener-
ally taken by young men who desired to become acquainted with
the people, and get into practice; as soon as this was accomplished
they gave way to others. He thought he saw many benefits aris-
ing from this office. His own county would have saved money if
she had had such an officer to attend to her business, and attend
to have good and sufficient sureties on bonds given by her officers.
This was the case in many other counties, and he hoped the section
would be adopted.

Mr. SERVANT offered an amendment, that the salary of the
officer should be fees, to be collected from the convicts, and in no
case to exceed five dollars.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess was opposed to the section,
and opposed, particularly, to the amendment of the gentleman
from Randolph. He was opposed to fixing the prosecuting attor-
ney's pay in fees. He would as soon think of making the judge's
salary to be collected in fees. What would it produce? Why
these prosecuting attorneys would go mousing about the
county or cities — particularly in the cities — and he would ferret
out every petty violation of the criminal code; he would make up
a case, hunt up some witnesses, carry them before the grand jury,
and the party would be indicted. The criminal would employ a
lawyer to defend him, pay him fifteen or twenty dollars, and the
case would come into court, and then the party would compromise
the case by paying the attorney his fee. This would be anything
but creditable. He was in favor of a circuit attorney, to be paid
a liberal salary; such a one as would command the best talent in
the circuit. If an attorney was chosen in each county, no lawyer,
except one just commencing business, or one whom the people
would not entrust their business with, would be induced to take
the office. No lawyer, for the pitiful sum of one hundred dollars

TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1847 797

a year, would give up the practice of defending accused persons,
whereby, if he had any talent, he could make a living. It would
be opening the door to corrupt practices on his part, for he cannot
otherwise make a living. It was not true that in the Jo Daviess
circuit they never had competent circuit state attorneys. They
had many eminent men there who had held the office — one of them
was now the Lieutenant Governor of the state, another was, at
present, the representative of the district in Congress, and another
was clerk of the canal board, at a salary of $1,000. And com-
petent men could still be found to take the office.

Mr. WITT moved the previous question; which was seconded.

The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. Ser-
vant, and it was rejected.

The question recurred on the adoption of the section, as
amended, and [was] decided, by yeas and nays, in the affirmative —
yeas 88, nays 49.

Sec. 22. The qualified electors of each county in this state
shall elect a clerk of the circuit court, who shall hold his office for
the term of four years, and until his successor shall be commis-
sioned and qualified, who shall perform such duties and receive
such compensation as may be prescribed by law. The clerk of
the circuit court in the county where the supreme court shall sit,
shall be clerk of the supreme court.

Mr. THOMAS moved to strike out all after "law."

The question was taken thereon, and decided in the affirma-
tive—yeas 57, nays 56.

Mr. THORNTON moved to strike out "commissioned" and
insert "elected;" carried.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to reconsider the vote striking out all
after the word "law" and the motion was rejected.

Mr. THOMAS moved to add to the section:

"Provided, that no person shall be eligible to the office of clerk
of any circuit court who shall not have obtained a certificate from
the supreme court, stating that he is qualified to perform the
duties of his office."

Mr. AKIN moved to lay the amendment on the table; carried —
yeas 75, nays not counted.

798 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. WHITESIDE offered the following, to be added to the
section :

' 'The clerk of the supreme court shall be elected in each divi-
sion by the qualified electors thereof, for the term of six years, and
until his successor is elected and qualified, whose duties and com-
pensation shall be provided by law.' '

The question being taken thereon, it was adopted — yeas 65,
nays 43.

The question recurred on the adoption of the section, as
amended, and it was adopted.

Mr. MARSHALL of Mason moved the following as additional
sections, and they were adopted.

"All judges, clerks, justices of the peace, and prosecuting
attorneys shall be commissioned by the Governor."

"All process, writs, and other proceedings, shall run in the
name of: "The people of the state of Illinois." All prosecutions
shall be carried on : ' 'In the name and by the authority of the people
of the state of Illinois," and conclude: "against the peace and dig-
nity of the same."

Mr. MARKLEY offered an additional section, providing for
the election of the judges by general ticket, and that such section
and section 3, (the district system,) shall be submitted to the
people for a separate vote; the one receiving the greater vote to
become a part of the constitution.

Mr. NORTHCOTT moved to lay it on the table; which motion
by yeas and nays was decided in the affirmative — yeas 72, nays 57.

Mr. PRATT offered an additional section, which was adopted,
as follows:

"The Legislature may authorize the judgments, decrees and
decisions of any local, inferior, court of record, of original, civil or
criminal jurisdiction, established in a city, to be removed for re-
view directly into the supreme court."

Mr. THORNTON moved to reconsider the vote by which the
6th section was adopted. Carried — yeas 60, nays 53.

Mr. LOGAN moved to reconsider the vote ordering the pre-
vious question thereon; and it was reconsidered.

Mr. THORNTON moved to strike out all of the section so as
to have it read thus: "The supreme court shall hold one term

TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1847 799

annually in each of the aforesaid grand divisions, at such time and
place, in such divisions, as the General Assembly shall by law
direct."

On which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and re-
sulted— yeas 89, nays 48.

Mr. MARKLEY offered a proviso: "that after 1855 the Legis-
lature may direct, by law, that said court shall be held in each
judicial circuit."

The question was taken thereon, by yeas and nays, and decided
in the negative — yeas 40, nays 86.

The Convention then adjourned till to-morrow at 8 o'clock.

LVIII. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST i8, 1847

Mr. CHURCHILL, from the special committee on Agricul-
ture, &c., presented two reports — a majority and minority report;
which were laid on the table and ordered to be printed.

Mr. KNAPP of Scott, from the committee on Law Reform,
made a report; which was laid on the table and ordered to be
printed.

THE JUDICIARY

Mr. HARVEY offered the following, to be added to the 6th
section:

"Provided, that after the year 1850, the General Assembly
may provide by law that a term of the supreme court shall be held
in one or more places in any of the said grand divisions, if in their
opinion the public good requires it."

The yeas and nays were ordered thereon, and resulted — yeas
55, nays 77.

Sec. 7. The state shall be divided into twelve judicial dis-
tricts, in each of which one circuit judge shall be elected by the
qualified electors thereof, who shall hold his office for the term
of six years, and until his successor shall be commissioned and
qualified; Provided, that the Legislature may increase the num-
ber of circuits to meet the future exigencies of the state.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to strike out "twelve" judicial
districts, and insert "nine."

Mr. WHITNEY said, that he was in favor of reducing it to nine
circuits, because he had given the subject of the judiciary and the
action of the Convention upon it considerable attention. He had
gone into an examination of the increased expenditures, created
by this new system, and the result induced him to pause and think
well before he further unnecessarily increased that sum. He had
calculated the cost of the new system, and found it enormous.
He estimated the cost of each county judge to be $400 a year,
and as there would be one hundred of them, their cost alone
800

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST i8, 1847 801

amounted to $40,000. Then came the justices of the peace for each
county — one to be chosen from each precinct— say eight in
each county — to whom he allowed ?i.5o, half the price of that
allowed at present to the county commissioners' court — and say
they sit one hundred days in the year, and their pay would amount
to over $19,000 per annum. Add to this the fees for the probate
business, which were not included. — Whole cost, including the pay
of the supreme and circuit judges, and it amounted to the enor-
mous sum of $75,000 a year, to be paid by the people for one
branch of the government. The only credits to go to this account,
the only reductions from the cost of the present system were —
$300 on the salary of each of the supreme judges, making $2,700
and the cost of the county commissioners' court, of $2,400; mak-
ing the sum of $5,100 — leaving an increase in the cost of our new
system over that at present in force of $70,300, a sum which he
thought should be sufficient to pay the whole expenses of the gov-
ernment of the state. The people looked at this matter, and
would consider it long before they would vote for its adoption.
He hoped the number would be reduced, and that the cost of the
judiciary may be reduced. He did not desire to leave here with
any prejudice against the new constitution, but these matters
were well calculated to make a man pause before he gave his sanc-
tion to any such system, requiring such a great amount of taxation
to support it.

Mr. SCATES asked a division of the question, so as to vote
first on striking out. He made some remarks to show that the
question should be divided; after which, the Convention refused
to divide the question.

The question was then taken on the amendment, and it was
carried.

The section was then adopted.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to reconsider the vote, but sub-
sequently withdrew the same.

Sections 8 and 9 were adopted, as follows:

Sec. 8. There shall be two or more terms of the circuit court
held annually in each county of this state at such times as shall
be provided by law, and said courts shall have jurisdiction in all

8o2 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

cases at law and equity, and in all cases of appeals from all in-
ferior courts.

Sec. 9. All vacancies in the supreme and circuit courts shall
be filled by election as aforesaid; Provided, however, that if the
unexpired term does not exceed one year, such vacancy may be
filled by executive appointment.

Section 10 was taken up —

Sec. 10. The judges of the supreme court shall receive a
salary of twelve hundred dollars per annum, payable quarterly,
and no more. The judges of the circuit courts shall receive a
salary of one thousand dollars, payable quarterly, and no more.
The judges of the supreme and circuit courts shall not hold any
other office or public trust in this state, nor the United States,
during the term for which they are elected, nor for one year there-
after. All votes for either of them for any elective office (except
that of judge of the supreme or circuit court) given by the Gen-
eral Assembly, or the people, shall be void.

Mr. SCATES offered an amendment; which was rejected.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison moved to strike out "|i,2oo,"
and insert "J 1,500." The question was taken by yeas and nays
and decided in the negative — yeas 44, nays 104.

Mr. HOGUE moved to strike out "Ji,2oo" and insert
"^1,000."

Mr. SIBLEY moved to strike out "Ji,aoo" and insert
"?i,400."

The question was taken and rejected. The question was then
taken by yeas and nays on the motion of Mr. Hogue, and it was
rejected — yeas 50, nays 86.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved to strike out all after
the words "no more," where they occur the second time.

In making the motion, Mr. C. said, that he would give his
reasons for the motion in a few words. — He would not have made
the motion had anything like an adequate salary been allowed the
judges of the supreme and circuit courts. But inasmuch as we
had allowed them merely enough to live upon, he considered it
unjust to cut them off from holding any other office which their
ambition might desire, or the people should feel disposed to elevate
them to. He could see no reason why they should be denied all

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST i8, 1847 803

political preferment because they were judges of the state, and
had the miserable salary we have allowed them. This was digging
deep the grave of every man who would take the office and who
had any aspirations to higher posts, or whom the people might
desire to elevate, and that, too, without allowing him sufficient
salary to pay for a decent grave after death. He doubted much
the constitutionality of the provision, and was of opinion that it
would be inoperative — a dead letter. — The Senate of the United
States would never inquire into the constitution of the state of
Illinois, when called upon to appoint a man to any office; nor
would either house of Congress ever ask a man who [had] come
there with a certificate of his election, whether the constitution
of his state allowed its judges to be chosen to any other office.
The only question asked him would be, was he eligible, under the
constitution of the United States? And if he were, then any pro-
vision in the constitution of the state to the contrary would be
disregarded. He opposed this part of the section on these grounds,
and hoped it would be stricken out. He viewed it as forever
denying men of mind or talent, of reputation and ability, the office
of judge; for no man would ever take the office if every other door
to honor and preferment was to be closed to him in consequence.
He considered this provision in the constitution as forever exclud-
ing from the bench in this state talent, and securing stupidity.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, he agreed with the gentleman from
Jo Daviess that this provision was of but little use, and that it
would never be operative, but still he would vote against striking
out.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the motion to
strike out, and decided in the negative — yeas 25, nays no.

Mr. WEST moved to strike out ' '$1,000,' ' and insert ' '$1,200.' '

Mr. PALMER of Marshall moved to strike out "$i,ooo" and
insert "$800."

The motions were both rejected, by yeas and nays. The first
vote standing — yeas 36, nays loi; the latter — yeas 50, nays 86.

Mr. SINGLETON offered an amendment; (which we did not
hear) and it was rejected.

The previous question was ordered and the section was adopted.

Sec. II. No person shall be eligible to the office of judge of

8o4 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

any court of this state who is not a citizen of the United States,
and who shall not have resided in this state two years next pre-
ceding his election, and who shall not, at the time of his election,
reside in the division, circuit or county in which he shall be elected.
Nor shall any person be elected judge of the supreme court who
shall be at the time of his election under the age of thirty-five
years. And no person shall be eligible to the office of judge of the
circuit court until he shall have attained the age of thirty years.

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to strike out "two
years," and insert "five years." Carried.

Mr. KENNER moved to amend by adding after "elected:"
"two years preceding his election;" which motion was carried.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to add: "and who shall not have
paid a state or county tax;" on which motion the yeas and nays
were ordered, and resulted — yeas 47, nays 95.

The section was then adopted.

Mr. LOGAN offered, as additional sections, the following:

Sec. — . County judges, clerks, sheriffs, and other county
officers, for wilful neglect of duty, or misdemeanor in office, shall
be liable to presentment or indictment by a grand jury, and trial
by a petit jury, and upon conviction shall be removed from office.

Sec. — . The election of all officers, and the filling of all vacan-
cies that may happen by death, resignation, or removal, not other-
wise directed or provided for by this constitution shall be made
in such manner as the legislature shall direct; Provided, that no
such officer shall be elected by the Legislature.

Sec. — . The first election for justices of the supreme court,
and judges of the circuit court, shall be held on the first Monday
of October, 1848, after the adoption of this article.

Sec. — . The second election for one justice of the supreme
court shall be held on the first Monday of June, 1852; and every
three years thereafter an election shall be held for one justice of
the supreme court.

Sec. — . On the first Monday of June, 1855, and every sixth
year thereafter, an election shall be held for judges of the cir-
cuit courts; Provided, whenever an additional circuit is made,
such provision may be made as to hold the second election of such
additional judge at the regular election herein provided.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST i8, 184.7 805

And the question being taken thereon, the same was adopted.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess offered, as an additional sec-
tion, the following:

Sec. — . There shall be elected in each county in this state,
by the qualified electors thereof, a sheriff, who shall hold his office
for the term of two years, and until his successor shall be elected
and qualified; Provided, that no person shall be eligible to the
office more than once in four years.

Messrs. Davis of Montgomery, Campbell and Morgan sup-
ported the amendment, and Messrs. Brockman and Bo^fD
opposed it.

Mr. WEAD advocated the term of four years, and moved to
strike out "two" and insert "four;" and the same was rejected —
yeas 40, nays 68.

Mr. AKIN moved a proviso.

Mr. PRATT moved the previous question; which was seconded.

The proviso was rejected.

And the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The Convention was called twice, and no quorum appeared.
The absentees were sent for, and at 25 minutes past three a quorum
appeared.

The question pending at the adjournment was on the section
proposed by Mr. Campbell of Jo Daviess.

Mr. ATHERTON moved to strike out "two years," and in-
sert "three." Withdrawn.

Mr. WEST moved to amend the proviso, so as to make it read:
"Shall not be eligible to election more than four years in any six."

Mr. McCALLEN supported the amendment, because the
office of sheriff for two years only would make the office of no value
to the sheriff.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery replied, and urged the adoption
of the section as first presented.

The question was taken on the amendment, by yeas and nays,
and decided — yeas 46, nays 93.

Mr. ECCLES moved to amend, by striking out "two years"
and inserting "four;" and the same was rejected.

8o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The question was taken on the section, and it was adopted —
yeas loi, nays 45.

Mr. SCATES offered the following, as an additional section;
which was adopted.

Sec. — . The clerks of the supreme and circuit courts, and
state's attorneys, shall be elected at the first special election for
judges; the second election for clerks of the Supreme court shall
be held on the first Monday of June, 1855, and every sixth year
thereafter. The first election for clerks of the circuit court, and
state's attorneys, shall be held on the Tuesday after the first
Monday of November, 1852, and every fourth year thereafter.

Mr. WEAD offered, as an additional section, the following:

"The Legislature shall provide, by law, for what cause, and
in what manner, the judges of the county courts of this state, the
clerks of courts, justices of the peace, and prosecuting attorneys,
and other county officers, may be removed from office.

A vote was taken thereon — yeas 57, nays 49. No quorum
voting.

Mr. ECCLES offered the following, as a substitute therefor:

' 'There shall be elected, at the general election in each county
in this state, by the qualified electors, a coroner, surveyor, and
collector. Also, in each justice's district a competent number of
constables, who shall hold their offices for the term of four years
and until their successors are elected and qualified, whose duties
shall be prescribed by law."

And the substitute was rejected — yeas 29.

The question was taken on the section of Mr. Wead; and it
was rejected.

[■ Sec. 12. Any judge of the supreme or circuit court may be
removed from office by address of both houses of the General
Assembly, if two-thirds of all the members elected of each house
concur therein.

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to strike out the section, and insert
the following; which motion was carried:

"For any reasonable cause, to be entered on the journals of
each house, which shall not be sufficient ground for impeachment,
both justices of the supreme court and judges of the circuit court
shall be removed from office on the vote of two-thirds of the mem-

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST i8, 1847 807

bers elected to each branch of the General Assembly; Provided,
always, that no member of either house of the General Assembly
shall be eligible to fill the vacancy occasioned by such removal;
Provided, also, that no removal shall be made unless the justice
or judge complained of shall have been served with a copy
of the complaint against him, and shall have an opportunity of
being heard in his own defence."

The section, as amended, was adopted.

And, on motion, the article was referred to the committee on
Revision.

BANKS

Mr. WEAD, from the select committee to whom had been
referred the petition of sundry citizens of Fulton county, praying
a prohibition of banks, and of the circulation of foreign paper,
reported the following article:

ARTICLE —

Sec. I. The Legislature shall pass no law creating any bank
or banks, or authorizing the issue of bank paper; and shall pro-
hibit, by adequate penalties, the circulation of all bank paper in
this state.

Sec. 2. The Legislature may provide by law that, at the
expiration of ten years from the adoption of this constitution, the
qualified electors of the state may vote for and against banks; if
a majority of the votes so cast shall be "for banks," then this
article shall be abolished, if otherwise, this article shall be in force
ten years more, when the same question may be again submitted
in the same manner, and with the same effect.

Sec. 3. This article shall be separately submitted to the
qualified electors of this state for adoption or rejection, at the
same election, and in the same manner, with the amended con-
stitution. If this amendment shall receive a majority of all the
votes cast for and against it at such election, then the same shall
become a part of the constitution of this state, and supersede all
other provisions upon the same subject.

The same being before the Convention —

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved the previous ques-
tion; which was ordered.

8o8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. LOGAN moved to reconsider the vote ordering the main
question — time should be given for consideration.

Mr. CALDWELL said, the question had already been con-
sidered, and the gentleman from Sangamon must be familiar with
the subject by this time. He hoped it would be settled at once.

The Convention refused to reconsider.

Mr. PRATT demanded the yeas and nays; which were ordered.

The question being taken on the adoption of the section, re-
sulted as follows:

Yeas— Akin, Allen, Archer, Armstrong, Blair, Ballingall,
Brockman, Bosbyshell, Brown, Crain, Caldwell, Campbell of Jo
Daviess, Campbell of McDonough, Carter, F. S. Casey, Zadoc
Casey, Colby, Constable, Cross of Winnebago, Cloud, Churchill,
Dale, Dunn, Frick, Henderson, Hill, Hogue, Hunsaker, Huston,
James, Jones, Kreider, Lasater, Laughlin, Lenley, McCuUy, Mc-
Clure, McHatton, Manly, Markley, MofFett, Moore, Morris,
Nichols, Oliver, Pace, Palmer of Macoupin, Pratt, Peters, Pinck-
ney, Powers, Robinson, Roman, Rountree, Scates, Stadden,
Shields, Sim, Simpson, Smith of Gallatin, Thompson, Trower,
Tutt, Vernor, Wead, Webber, Williams, Whiteside. — 68.

Nays — Adams, Anderson, Atherton, Choate, Church, Davis
of Montgomery, Dawson, Deitz, Dummer, Dunlap, Duns-
more, Edwards of Madison, Edwards of Sangamon, Eccles,
Graham, Geddes, Green of Clay, Green of Jo Daviess, Green of
Tazewell, Grimshaw, Harding, Harlan, Harper, Harvey, Hatch,
Hawley, Hay, Holmes, Hurlbut, Jackson, Judd, Knapp of Jersey,
Knapp of Scott, Kenner, Kinney of Bureau, Knowlton, Knox,
Lander, Lemon, Lockwood, Logan, Loudon, McCallen, Marshall
of Coles, Marshall of Mason, Mason, Mieure, Miller, Minshall,
Palmer of Stark, Rives, Robbins, Sharpe, Swan, Spencer, Servant,
Sibley, Smith of Macon, Shumway, Thomas, Thornton, Turner,
Tuttle, Vance, West, Witt, Whitney, Woodson, Worcester — 69.

Absent — Blakely, Bond, Bunsen, Butler, Canady, Cross of
Woodford, Davis of McLean, Davis of Massac, Dement, Edmon-
son, Evey, Farwell, Gregg, Hayes, Heacock, Hoes, Jenkins,
Kinney of St. Clair, Kitchell, Matheny, Northcott, Norton,
Sherman, Singleton, TurnbuU.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST i8, 1847 809

Mr. SERVANT moved to take up the report of the select
committee on Commons. Carried.

It was read and adopted as follows:

' 'Sec. — . All lands which have been granted, as a ' 'Common,"
to the inhabitants of any town, hamlet, village or corporation, by
any person, body politic or corporate, or by any government hav-
ing power to make such grant, shall forever remain common to
the inhabitants of such town, hamlet, village or corporation; but
the said commons, or any of them, or any part thereof, may be
divided, leased or granted, in such manner as may, hereafter,
be provided by law, on petition of a majority of the qualified voters
interested in such commons, or any of them."

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to take up the report of the com-
mittee on Revenue as amended. Carried.

Mr. HAYES asked leave to record his vote on the question of
banks, just decided; he was absent at the time and would like to
record his vote.

Objections were made, and the Chair put the question — Shall
the gentleman be permitted to vote?

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon raised a point of order, could
the gentleman be allowed to vote after the result was announced,
if so, why not allow every man who was absent to record his vote
to-morrow or whenever he should come in?

The PRESIDENT said, that after the vote he would make a
decision.

The vote was taken, and resulted — yeas 39, nays 54.

The PRESIDENT ruled that the gentleman was precluded
from voting under a rule of the Convention, and to allow him to
vote required two-thirds; two-thirds not voting therefor, he
could not vote.

The Convention then resumed the consideration of the revenue
report, section after section. The committee proposed to strike
out all inserted in parentheses, and insert what is given in italics.

Sec. I . The Legislature (shall) may cause to be collected from
all able-bodied free white male inhabitants of this state, over the
age of twenty-one years and under the age of sixty years, who are
entitled to the right of suffrage, a capitation tax of not less than fifty
cents nor more than one dollar each, when the Legislature may deem

8io ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

it necessary, (to be applied yearly to the payment of the interest
due and to become due from this state to the school, college, and
seminary funds; and if in any year there shall remain any balance
of said tax, after the payment of the interest due for that year,
such balance shall be paid into the state treasury.)

The question being on concurring with the committee of the
whole on striking out "shall" and inserting "may" in the first
line,

Mr. WOODSON demanded the yeas and nays.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess thought that "may" had
been agreed upon as a compromise and hoped it would be retained.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery had voted for "may" as a com-
promise, and had offered a resolution of instructions to the
committee to that effect; but he would now vote for ' 'shall' ' because
such was the universal voice of his county.

Mr. HAYES said, as this is one of the questions in which I
have taken much interest, I desire to define my position before
the vote may be taken.

The resolution of the gentleman from Montgomery (Mr.
Davis) which was under discussion early in the session, and which
I then supported, instructed the committee on Revenue to report
an article giving the Legislature power to impose a poll tax. It
is now proposed to compel the Legislature to levy such a tax — in
other words to pass a constitutional tax. I am individually
in favor of a poll tax, and should I become a candidate for a seat in
the next General Assembly, would express that opinion before the
people, and if elected would endeavor to carry it out. But, sir,
I am not now, and never have been in favor of imposing any tax
by the constitution. It is not within the province of this Conven-
tion to tax the people. That is their own right — to be exercised
at their discretion through their representatives in the General
Assembly. Let them hold the purse-strings of the state. It is
not right to levy a tax upon the people by engrafting in the organic
law a provision that it shall be levied.

I repeat I am opposed to any and every proposition to impose
a tax by a constitutional provision. I shall, therefore, vote to
concur in the amendment made in committee of the whole, strik-

IFEBNESDAY, AUGUST i8, 1847 811

ing out "shall" and inserting "may" in the first section of the
report.

Mr. ARCHER was opposed to the poll tax upon principle, but
would vote for the word ' 'may' ' as a compromise. The people of
his county were divided on the subject, and he would vote for
giving the Legislature power to levy the tax when the people
desired it. The word "shall" should never have been in the
article; it was reported against the express instruction of the Con-
vention to the committee, and he hoped that it would never be
replaced.

Mr. THOMAS opposed the last amendment of the committee —
the striking out of the last part of the section — in parenthesis.

Mr. KNOWT.TON was in favor of a poll tax upon principle.

Mr. HUNSAKER moved the previous question; which was
seconded.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on agreeing with
the committee of the whole in striking out "shall" and inserting
' 'may' ' and resulted — yeas 96, nays 42.

The yeas and nays were taken on concurring in the insertion
of the words, "who are entitled to the right of suffrage," and
resulted — yeas 78, nays 52.

The other amendments were concurred in, and the section as
amended, was adopted.

On motion the Convention adjourned till to-morrow at 8 a. m.

LIX. THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Bergen.

Mr. GREGG, from the select committee of twenty-seven,
appointed to apportion the state into 25 senatorial and 75 repre-
sentative districts made a report.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean said, he hoped it would be laid on the
table and ordered to be printed.

Mr. GREGG thought that it may as well be considered now,
and adopted or rejected; members were familiar with the counties
composing each district, and were as ready to vote now as at any
other time. He had no particular objections to the printing, but
he saw no use in delaying the matter.

Mr. KNOWLTON said, he would not vote for any thing until
he had had time to examine it. It had not been read yet, and
still a desire was expressed to have it passed through the Con-
vention. He hoped it would be printed [so] that everyone could see
how their districts were made up. At present no one but those
on the committee knew anything about it.

Mr. BALLINGALL hoped it would be printed. He moved
that 250 copies be printed.

Mr. WEST could see no necessity for the printing, everyone
almost could understand it sufficiently well by hearing it read, to
say whether he would vote for it or not.

The question was taken on the motion to print, and resulted —
yeas 65, nays 67.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac moved to reconsider the vote just
taken. It was evident, he thought, that members should have
an opportunity to examine the subject before voting upon it.

Mr. Z. CASEY demanded that the report be read before any
further action be had upon it; they should at least know what they
were disputing about.

The report was read by the Secretary.

The question was then taken on reconsideration, and resulted —
yeas 65, nays 71.

812

THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1847 813

Mr. CALDWELL moved that that portion of the report, dis-
tricting the counties composing the third judicial circuit be referred
to a select committee of nine.

At the last meeting of the committee, a change had been made
in the districts, embraced in that circuit, and he hoped they might
have an opportunity to restore it to the position it had before.

Mr. McCALLEN hoped the motion would prevail. This was
a subject in which the people were deeply interested, and one in
which every member had an interest, and he could not see why
the committee should desire to rush their report, of which none
knew anything but themselves, through the Convention without
the least time for examination or consideration. He would vote
against it if compelled to vote now. Why did the committee
oppose the printing? Why were they afraid to have members
examine their work? Their very haste and anxiety to have this
matter rushed through the Convention, to force it upon members,
would induce him to pause before voting for it, and to insist upon
its being printed.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac hoped the motion made by the member
from Gallatin would prevail. The report of the committee, in
relation to the counties embraced in the third judicial district,
had been agreed upon and considered settled to the satisfaction of
every delegate from that circuit; but at the last meeting, one
member of the committee moved a reconsideration in order to
make some alteration in respect to his own county. This was
acceded to, but, in the absence of the other members from the
circuit, not only was a change made to suit that one member, but
in doing so, they had gone on and changed every district, senatorial
and representative, in the circuit. The change we assented to,
was in the district composed of Jefferson, Wayne and Marion, and
he at the time considered it was to have gone no farther. He
hoped the motion would prevail, and that the circuit might be
constructed to suit the majority of its members, and not one single
delegate.

Mr. HOGUE said, he was the "one member" alluded to by
the gentleman from Massac. He had made the motion to recon-
sider because under the first arrangement he found Wayne county
put out of its proper circuit, and taken away from those counties

8 14 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

with which it had heretofore been connected, and between whom
there was a community of feeling and interest. He had made this
movement in justice to his own county, and did not desire to
break up more than necessary the arrangements of other persons
in the community.

The PRESIDENT said, that upon reflection he considered
the motion to refer a portion of the report to be out of order.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison moved that the report be laid on
the table, and 200 copies be ordered to be printed.

Mr. HARDING moved the previous question.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved the report be laid on the table. Carried.

Mr. EDWARDS moved that 200 copies be printed. Carried.

Mr. LOGAN presented the report of the select committee of
nine, appointed to divide the state into three divisions for judicial
purposes; which was read.

Mr. LOGAN moved that the report be amended so as that
Clark and Cumberland counties be added to the middle division,
instead of the southern. He said that he made the motion at the
unanimous suggestion of the delegates from the southern division.
And the motion was adopted.

Mr. MARKLEY moved that the report be laid on the table
and 250 copies ordered to be printed. Agreed to — yeas 69, nays
58.

The Convention then resumed the consideration of the report
of the committee on Revenue.

Sec. 2. The Legislature shall provide for levying a tax by
valuation, so that every person and corporation shall pay a tax in
proportion to the value of his or her property; such value to be
ascertained by some person or persons, to be elected or appointed
(in each county in the state), in such manner as the Legislature
shall direct, and not otherwise; but the Legislature shall have
power to tax peddlers, auctioneers, brokers, hawkers, merchants,
commission merchants, showmen, jugglers, inn-keepers, grocery-
keepers, toll-bridges, and ferries, and persons using and exercising
franchises and privileges, in such manner as they shall from time
to time direct.

Mr. WOODSON moved to amend the same by prefixing there-
to, as a separate section, the following:

THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1847 815

"Sec. — . The General Assembly shall cause to be collected
from all free white male inhabitants of this state over the age of
twenty-one years and under sixty years, a capitation tax of not
less than fifty cents, nor more than one dollar annually, to be
applied as the Legislature rhay direct. Said tax to continue until
the payment of the public debt of the state.

"Sec. — . At the election to which shall be submitted the
constitution to the people for their ratification or rejection, a
separate poll shall be opened for and against a poll tax, and if a
majority of those voting on said question shall be in favor of such
tax, then the foregoing section shall stand in lieu of the first section ;
but if a majority of the votes polled shall be against the poll tax,
then the said first section shall not be and remain a part of this
constitution."

Mr. SCATES reminded the house that every proposition that
had been ofi^ered to be submitted to the people separately had
been voted down. If in order, he would move, as an amendment
to the amendment, the alternate proposition of bank or no bank.

Mr. GREGG said, that he wished merely to express his sincere
hope that the amendment of the gentleman from Greene would not
be adopted. On a former occasion he had explained his views on
the subject, and did not intend to take up the time of the Con-
vention now. He regarded a poll tax as wrong in principle, and
unjust, grossly unjust, and oppressive in its operation. It was,
he thought, anti-republican and contrary to the whole spirit of
our institutions. Entertaining this view, he would vote for no
proposition for a poll tax. It could not be presented in any phase
or shape so as to be acceptable to him. He was opposed to it
under all circumstances, and he trusted the Convention would not
subject the people to the necessity of rejecting a measure which
they could not but regard as an infringement of their rights, and
a violation of justice.

Messrs. Peters, Shields, Palmer of Marshall and McCallen
expressed themselves in favor of a poll tax.

Mr. ATHERTON moved the previous question; which was
ordered — yeas 59, nays 51.

The question was taken, by yeas and nays, on the amendment
of Mr. WooDSON, and it was rejected — yeas 61, nays 77.

8i6 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

The section was then adopted.

In section three an enumeration of the property to be exempt
from taxation had been stricken out in committee of the whole,
and the following was substituted:

"The property of the state and counties, both real and personal,
and such other property as the Legislature may deem necessary
for school, religious, and charitable purposes, may be exempted
from taxation."

Mr. WOODSON offered as an additional section to precede
section three, the amendment just rejected, modified by the
omission of the word "not," where it last occurs.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess addressed the Convention in
opposition to the poll tax. He opposed it upon every ground and
principle of justice, and opposed it more particularly in its present
shape. He thought it time for gentlemen to stop in endeavors to
engraft these odious federal measures upon the constitution.
Already there had been adopted a banking system which could
not be shaken off, but which like the shirt of Nessus would stick
to us forever. We had compromised on every subject, had given
up everything, and such was the pertinac[it]y of gentlemen in
urging these unjust measures that longer concession would be
degradation. He would yield no more. The Convention had
placed unwarrantable restrictions upon the right of suffrage,
had adopted measures, the tendency of which would be to exclude
foreigners from emigrating to our state, had adopted a sort of
piebald judiciary, the like of which was never heard anywhere
else, and which no other set of men could be found to adopt, and
still they were not satisfied, but desired to force upon us this poll
tax which has been voted down again and again. He warned
gentlemen to pause in their course, to stop in their reckless
endeavors to fasten these odious principles upon the constitution.
They offer it now as a separate section to be voted upon by the
people, and talk loudly of the right of the people to be heard upon
the subject. A new light, it seemed, had broken upon them.
Where was their principle yesterday when we proposed prohibition
of banks to the people? Where has all this peculiar respect for
the wishes of the people been during the past months of the Con-
vention ? Why did they refuse to present to the people the isolated

THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 184.7 817

question of bank or no bank? But this is a favorite measure of these
gentlemen, and having failed here in engrafting it upon the con-
stitution, they desire to try it before the people, and forever fasten
upon us a constitutional poll tax. He hoped it would be voted
down.

Mr. AKIN moved that the amendment be laid on the table.

On which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted
— yeas 71, nays 71 ; rejected.

Messrs. Hayes, Davis of Massac, Davis of Montgomery, and
Palmer of Macoupin continued the discussion in favor of a poll
tax, and Messrs. Scates, Farwell and Archer in opposition to it.

Mr. ATHERTON moved the previous question; which was
ordered.

And then, on motion, the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the amendment
of Mr. WooDSON, and it was rejected — yeas 61, nays 76.

The section was then adopted as given above.

Section 4 was read. It is the long provision submitted by
Judge LocKwooD some weeks ago, and published then in the pro-
ceedings, in relation to the mode of collecting taxes, and present-
ing the requisites for the valid sale of land for taxes.

Mr. DAWSON moved to amend, by adding the following as
an additional section:

"The Legislature shall cause the several county clerks in this
state, at the proper time, to make out in tabular form a list of all
lands on which taxes remain due and unpaid for the year last past,
and place the same in the hands of the assessor for tbe next year,
whose duty it shall be, when he assesses lands, to compare the
assessment with the delinquent list, and should they find any
lands on the delinquent list which belongs to any citizen of their
respective counties, they shall notify the citizen thereof, and no
lands shall be offered for sale until the same be advertised for at
least three weeks in some newspaper printed in this state, nearest
where the lands lie, and after the time in which the assessment
is to close according to law.' '

8i8 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

[Mr. DAWSON said, in offering the amendment to the report
of the committee of the whole on the revenue, he [had] done so
under a sense of duty he owed his constituents; he had nothing
in view but to secure them and others in their rights. The section
as it now stands, does not secure the object I wish to attain. That
sir, only secures to the landholder certain rights after his land is
sold for taxes. I wish sir, as far as possible to prevent citizens'
lands from being sold for taxes. The amendment I offer sir, for
the consideration of the convention if adopted, will secure that
object. The proposition will carry the evidence to every man
and that without cost, whether he has paid his taxes on his own
or some other person's lands. This is the object I have in view;
this is the object I wish to accomplish. It is known by every
gentleman on this floor, that mistakes often occur in lands by the
assessors, clerks or sheriffs, in the transacting of their business as
officers, and thereby many had as they thought, honorably paid
their taxes; but sir, without any fault on their part, when too late
they found their lands had been sold for taxes and in the hands of
the speculator. To obviate this, he had offered his amendment,
and said Mr. Dawson, if this amendment is adopted you will
greatly prevent the sale of lands for taxes; you will place the
necessary information in the possession of every man, whether he
has paid in his taxes properly or not; you will sir, save all the cost
which must necessarily accrue before the proposition to which
this is an amendment, can benefit any one but printers and officers.
By its adoption, you will save many the painful necessity of pur-
chasing at a heavy rate, their own lands from the speculator.
With this plain common sense view of its importance, I hope sir,
if the convention does intend to adopt the section which allows
there does an evil exist in improperly selling land for taxes, they
will adopt my amendment or some other that will secure the object
desired. I will say, sir, that the section as adopted by the com-
mittee of the whole does not propose a proper remedy; that only
proposes a remedy after the evil exists. I wish to prevent the
evil, and then sir, there will be no need for the remedy proposed
by the committee. Adopt the amendment I offer sir, and you
will hear but little more complaint of lands being sold for taxes.]"

'*This speech by Dawson is taken from the Sangamo Journal, August 24.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1847 819

And the question being taken thereon by yeas and nays, was
decided in the negative — yeas 50, nays 84.

Messrs. Church and Knapp of Scott offered some verbal
amendments to the section, which were adopted.

Messrs. Williams, Wead and Vance offered substitutes for
the section; which were rejected.

And the section was then adopted — yeas 76, nays 56.

Mr. LOCKWOOD offered, as an additional section, the follow-
ing:

' 'No lands in this state shall be assessed at less than one dollar
and fifty cents per acre.

Mr. McCALLEN opposed the section, and moved to strike
out "one dollar and;" which motion was rejected.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to strike out ^1.50 and insert $2.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery requested those who made this
proposition to point out its justice. How could they expect
assessors, under the solemn obligations of an oath, to say lands
were worth $i an acre, when in fact it was not worth that?

The question was taken, and the motion rejected — yeas 43,
nays 87.

Mr. LOCKWOOD modified his amendment by reducing the
sum to $1.25.

Mr. SCATES offered as a substitute for the proposed section:

"In all elections all white male inhabitants, over the age of
21 years, having resided in the state one year next preceding the
election, shall enjoy the right of an elector; but no person shall be
entitled to vote, except in the county or district in which he shall
actually reside at the time of the election."

Mr. THOMAS moved the substitute be rejected.

On which motion ensued a long discussion upon a point of
order; and, finally,

Mr. SCATES withdrew his substitute.

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to lay the proposed section on the table;
which motion was rejected — yeas 67, nays 67.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved a call of the Convention;
which was ordered, and 142 members answered the call.

Mr. LEMON moved to suspend all further proceedings under

820 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the call, on which motion no quorum voted. A second vote was
had, and 90 voted in the affirmative.

Mr. McCALLEN offered, as a substitute for the proposed
section, the following:

' 'AH taxation levied upon property shall be by actual apprais-
ment valuation."

On which the yeas and nays were taken, and resulted — yeas
76, nays S^-

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon said, that as the substitute had
accomplished its object — the defeat of the original — he moved it
be laid on the table. Carried.

Sec. 5. The corporate authorities of counties, townships,
school districts, cities, towns, and villages, may be vested with
power to assess and collect taxes for corporate purposes, such taxes
to be uniform in respect to persons and property, within the juris-
diction of the body imposing the same.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved to add to it the follow-
ing; which was adopted:

"And the Legislature shall require that all the property within
the limits of municipal corporations, belonging to individuals,
shall be taxed for the payment of debts, contracted under the
authority of the law."

Mr. TURNBULL offered an additional section; which was
laid on the table.

Section six was read and adopted, as follows:

Sec. 6. The specification of the objects and subjects of taxa-
tion shall not deprive the General Assembly of the power to require
other objects or subjects to be taxed in such manner as may be
consistent with the principles of taxation fixed in this constitution.

The article was then referred to the committee on Revi-
sion, &c.

And then the Convention adjourned till to-morrow at 8 a. m.

LX. FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847

The Convention was called, and 141 answered to their names.

Mr. ECCLES moved to take up the report of the committee
on the Division of the State into Counties, and their Organization;
which motion was carried.

Sec. I. No new county shall be formed or established by the
Legislature which will reduce the county or counties, or either of
them from which it shall be taken, to less contents than four hun-
dred square miles, nor shall any county be formed of less contents,
nor any line of which shall pass within less than ten miles of any
county seat already established.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to strike out all after "contents,"
where it last occurs.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison hoped the motion would prevail.
The present county of Madison would probably be hereafter
divided. Such was at present contemplated by the people of the
county. In case it was divided, the city of Alton would, in all
probability, be the choice and desire of the people as the seat of
justice and of county business. — This section would, if passed, for-
ever prohibit this object and desire of the people from being
carried into effect. He was in favor of leaving this subject open,
to be decided by the people, whenever they may choose to change
the county lines, remove the county seat, or to divide the county.
He sincerely hoped the amendment would be adopted.

Messrs. Davis of McLean and Bond declared themselves
favorable to every project that would be advantageous to Alton,
but they considered the section, which had been reported in
obedience to instructions from the Convention, so highly beneficial
to the whole people, so preventive of useless and expensive legis-
lation, as had always been the case heretofore, that they felt
constrained to support the subject.

Mr. GRAHAM was in favor of the amendment. He thought
the subject of division of counties, changing and locating county
seats, was one properly belonging to thepeopleof the counties in-
821

822 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

terested, and one in which their voice should always be heard.
They had a right to petition in such cases for relief when it was
desirable, and any constitutional provision denying them this right
was unwarranted and unprecedented.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess sincerely hoped the amend-
ment would not pass. It was one the propriety of which he could
not see. It was intended for the benefit of one or two places in
the state, to the injury of the other portions of the state. It was,
it had been said, for the future benefit of Alton. He believed the
same city of Alton has occupied more of the time of the Legislature
than any other town, city, or county in the state. Since he had
been an observer of the action of the Legislature, this city of Alton
has occupied a very considerable portion of the time of the Legis-
lature every session. It would appear that there was a strong
desire existing somewhere to build up that city by legal enact-
ments rather than by a dependence on its natural position, or its
resources for business. — He would have no objection to this did it
not prejudice the interests of other sections of the state, and
particularly the county he represented. That county was now a
large one, but had at one time been much larger. It was the
mother of all the counties surrounding it, and the Legislature had
gone on continually cutting off county after county, and now
there is a desire felt to cut off still another slice. It is high time
this work should stop, and some permanency [be] given to our counties
and our county seats. It was a subject which had worked much
evil — had retarded more than any other cause the progress of the
state. There was an universal fever to divide the counties,
created by the operations of a few designing men interested in a
change of county seats, or the creation of a new batch of county
officers. We must have some stability in our county lines. For
instance, we have a county, and the county seat is established in
the centre, men come there from other parts of the country, be-
lieving that the county seat is fixed and permanent, they invest
their money in property, erect buildings and enter in[to] extensive
improvements, all based upon the assurance that the county seat
was fixed; but hardly have these things occurred, when a petition
is got up by a few interested persons, and the first thing we hear
is that the county is divided, and the county seat changed, and all

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 823

these investments rendered worthless. This has been the experi-
ence of all past legislation, and it is high time that it should cease.
Once let a question of a division of a county be agitated, and the
people of the county lose sight of every other question, all elections
turn upon the question of division, the members of the Legislature
are elected with a view to that question, and the people are never
quiet till that question is disposed of. He hoped this species of
legislation would be stopped. He would infinitely prefer that
many of the small counties should be boiled down into one, than
that large counties should be divided up into small ones. Illinois
now had counties enough. To divide them only increased the
expenses of the people, and retarded the interests of the state by
destroying all stability and confidence. The expenses of the
government of a small county were nearly as much as those of a
large one, and he earnestly hoped that for the interests of the
people — for the welfare of the state — for the permanency of our
county organizations, and to avoid the long waste of time by future
legislatures in considering this subject, that the amendment would
not pass, but the section [be] adopted as first reported.

Mr. JENKINS defended the report of the majority of the
committee, and argued against the section now before them as
unjust in principle, and wrong in its practical results.

Mr. WHITNEY favored the amendment, and desired that the
report of the majority of the committee should be adopted in
preference to this report made under instructions of the Conven-
tion.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the amendment,
and it was rejected — yeas 48, nays 91.

Mr. ECCLES moved to make the last line read, "less than
ten miles of any county seat of the county or counties proposed
to be divided, already established.' ' Adopted.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to add the following proviso: "Pro-
vided, however, a county may be divided into two counties when-
ever a majority of the legal voters shall be in favor of the same,
when each of said counties shall contain not less than four hundred
square miles."

Mr. MARSHALL of Coles moved to lay the amendment on
the table.

824 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. MARKLEY asked the yeas and nays; which were ordered,
and resulted — yeas 70, nays 69.

Mr. ECCLES moved the previous question; which was ordered.

The section was then adopted.

Sec. 2. No county shall be divided or have any part stricken
therefrom without submitting the question to a vote of the people
of the county, nor unless a majority of all the legal voters of the
county shall vote for the same

Mr. HOLMES offered as an amendment, to insert "voting on
the question." Carried.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon offered the following as an
amendment, to be added to the section:

"Nor shall any territory be taken from any county unless a
majority of the voters within the territory proposed to be cut off
shall be in favor of having their territory form any portion of
another county."

Mr. CLOUD said, that upon this question he felt considerable
anxiety, and desired to say a few words which perhaps might as
well be said now, as at any other time. The question involved in
the section now before them, was one in which a large portion of
his constituents felt much interest, perhaps they were more inter-
ested in it than in any other that had come before the Convention,
it was i/ie question with them, and on its decision depended in a
great measure their support of the constitution. He believed
that if this section be inserted in the constitution, that the people
of his county and of a portion of the counties of Macoupin and
Sangamon would not support the constitution no matter how
perfect were its other provisions, nor how much other provisions
were in accordance with their sentiments and opinions. It had
for a long time been the desire of a large portion of the people of
his county, to be formed into a new county to be composed of
parts of the counties of Morgan, Macoupin and Sangamon, and
the desire to do so has generally obtained the approval of the large
majority of the people residing in those parts of those counties,
proposed to be so united. They have petitioned the Legislature
for years to form the new county, but they have never been heard,
their petitions have been unattended to, and they have been denied
the right of forming themselves into that government which they

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 825

desire, and which they should have. At the last session of the
Legislature they again petitioned that body for the formation of
this new county, their petition was heard and their claims were
attended to; a bill passed the House of Representatives for that
purpose, after considerable debate and a fair investigation of the
facts, but it was lost in the Senate by one vote.

Mr. C. would not trespass on the time of the Convention were
not this a question in which the people he represented were more
interested than in any other, because he thought that if he did not
present their claims, insist on their rights, and endeavor to obtain
for them the benefit of just laws, he would be derelict in his duty
as a representative and unfaithful in the discharge of his duties.
For these reasons, and in the hope of securing to his constituents
and their interests and rights a safe protection by constitutional
provisions, he had spoken upon the subject. He could not see
why gentlemen pressed this section, which was so unjust in its
operation upon the rights of minorities. By the section just
adopted we had effectually secured the old counties from all danger
of division and from the approach of county seats near their lines,
they had been protected fully from being reduced or divided down
to an area of less than 400 square miles, and were they not satisfied ?
There had also been an ample provision adopted, that no new
counties should be formed of a less area than 400 square miles,
and still they were not satisfied. What did gentlemen want?
Not satisfied with protection against the formation of small coun-
ties, not content with the provision that no new county shall be
formed whose county seat shall come within ten miles of the county
hne of any county now established, which, in his opinion, amounted
nearly to a total prohibition of any new county, but they must
go farther, and forever crush the rights of the minority of the
people. They must abandon all those principles of a free govern-
ment, that declare, that while a majority shall rule, yet the rights
of the minority shall be sacred. Do gentlemen desire that mi-
norities shall have no voice, that their rights and interests shall be
trampled under foot by a wild uncompromising majority? He
hoped not, yet this provision was in effect a denial to the minority
of the people of any county of the right to petition for a division of
that county. Any person at all acquainted with the geography

826 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of territory composed of a portion of the counties of Sangamon,
Macoupin and Morgan, would at once perceive how just was the
demand of the people living in the outskirts of those counties and
adjoining each other, that they should be formed into a new
county. They were situated so far from the seats of their respec-
tive counties, that they were cut off from all local interest, and
being near each other, a community of feeling and interest had
grown up, which had created this strong desire to be formed into
a new county, which would afford them greater facilities in attend-
ing to their county business, than they possessed at present, be-
cause now the county seats were twenty miles away. No one
could deny the justice of their demand, yet they formed but a
minority of the people of each county. Was this Convention
prepared to deny the just demands of minorities? Were they
prepared to forever deny them the right of petition in a just cause?
Has all regard for the rights of minorities of the people been lost,
and were they to be reduced to the position of ' 'hewers of wood
and drawers of water" for overruling and tyrannical majorities?
Were the Convention now ready to deny the people, or any por-
tion of them, in the organic law of the state, the right to petition
the Legislature on a subject which to them is of vital importance,
and to deny the Legislature the power to grant them the relief,
the right, and the justice they demand? He hoped these things
would be well considered before the Convention would forever
cut off the minority of the people of the counties from being
heard by the Legislature. For the reasons given, and on the
grounds that the whole was wrong in principle, and would be
oppressive in its operation, he hoped the section would not be
adopted.

Mr. LOGAN replied to Mr. C, and urged the adoption of the
amendment.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin was in favor of the amendment
proposed by the gentleman from Sangamon. He did not believe that
the inhabitants of any part of a county had the right to have
that part stricken off and added to another county without the
consent of the people of the whole county. Such was the opinion
of the people in his county.

Mr. SINGLETON was in favor of leaving the whole subject

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 827

open to future legislation; and moved to lay the amendment on
the table; which motion prevailed — yeas 57, nays 53.

Mr. BROWN moved to amend the section by adding thereto
the following:

"Where a county, either now or hereafter to be established,
shall be situated on the navigable waters of this state, the county
seat thereof may be established on said navigable waters, where
the county line may run within less than ten miles of a county
seat, provided a majority of the legal voters of the county concur
therein."

Mr. WEST said, that he was much opposed to the division
of counties, and hoped that this convention would do something
that would effectually check that evil. He regarded the past
course of the Legislature on this subject as very objectionable,
and as having given rise to much difficulty. Illinois, with a ter-
ritory less than many of the states, and with a population of not
more than a third or fourth of some of them, had now more counties
than any state in the Union, and would continue to make more by
the division of some of those already established, unless the Legis-
lature by constitutional provision should be restricted. The
restrictions proposed by the committee would entirely fail in hav-
ing any effect to prevent the establishment hereafter of any num-
ber, however large. With such restrictions Illinois now might have
178 counties. New York might have 468.

He believed the sense of the Convention had been fully mani-
fested when by a vote of a majority of all the members of this
Convention, they had instructed the committee to report certain
articles which that committee had seen fit to protest against.

He could not vote for the proposition of his colleague (Mr.
Brown) it looked to him as being unequal in its nature — it pro-
posed to give to some counties privileges which were not to be
given to all, and was for that cause, if no other, objectionable.
He hoped his honorable colleague did not, in submitting that
proposition, look to the future division of his county. What was
her present situation? A large debt had been incurred for the
purpose of making improvements, the Legislature had, by special
enactment, authorized Madison county to levy and collect of her
citizens a special tax to .pay for certain bridges which had been

828 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

built near the city of Alton. These bridges were necessary, and
the tax was submitted to by her citizens and paid without a mur-
mur. But he would ask, what fairness was there in giving to her,
as a river county, the opportunity of dividing and thereby leaving
the old county to pay off, by onerous and heavy taxation, the
large debt which had been contracted for the benefit of the whole
county? Why should the county seat be removed to Alton, for
the particular benefit of some of the legal profession at that place?

Something had been said about the city of Alton. He wished
to be understood as not being opposed to Alton in the least degree.
He looked to her present and future prosperity with pleasure and
with pride. The interest of the city of Alton was in a very great
degree his interest. Amongst her citizens he numbered many of
his personal and political friends, and the action of one of the
citizens of the town in which he resided occupying a seat in the
Senate of the state during the last session of the Legislature, had
shown that the interest of Alton was regarded as the interest of
the county. She must, however, look to her commercial situa-
tion, and the energy, enterprise and generosity of her citizens to
advance in wealth and greatness. He believed she possessed all
these, and the proposition of his honorable colleague was un-
necessary to add essentially to her advancement. He was ready
here, or elsewhere, to give his vote and lend his aid to every
proper means to advance her interest that would be equal and
just in its operation. But in voting against the proposition of
his colleague, he did it from a sense of duty and hoped that he
would not be misunderstood.

Mr. BROWN said, he was surprised to hear objections to
the section proposed by him coming from his colleague, (Mr.
West), and not less so at the ground of the objections urged by
the gentleman from Jo Daviess (Mr. Campbell). Both his
colleague and the gentleman from Jo Daviess had seen fit, in the
course of their remarks, to treat the section under consideration
as having been prepared by him, and its adoption urged, for the
exclusive benefit of Alton. The section proposed by him, as an
amendment to the report of the committee, was certainly any-
thing but exclusive in its operation and upon its face contained
nothing but what would equally apply to all the counties border-

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 829

ing upon the rivers in the state. Why, then, oppose a measure
which was so well calculated to secure all the advantages which
counties upon navigable waters enjoyed when their county seats
were located upon the river? The gentleman from Peoria (Mr.
Peters) had this morning spoken of the propriety of river counties
disregarding the geographical centre, and of placing their county
seats upon the river; and the reasoning of that gentleman, it
appeared to him, was conclusive. Why, then, deny to counties
similarly situated, the same right, when the same reasons exist,
and in many cases to a much greater extent. He said, that the
course of his colleague (Mr. West) upon the subject of counties
had appeared to him very strange, and, so far as Madison county
was concerned, altogether unwarranted. No movement in that
county, so far as he knew, had taken place, in reference to a divi-
sion of that county, and certainly none, at any time, in the city
of Alton. He had seen nothing which ought to call forth such
active exertions from that gentleman, and he was afraid that the
imagination of his colleague had become over excited, and that
something serious might be apprehended from his mania on the
subject of the division of counties. He regretted that Madi-
son county had been mentioned in the discussion of his prop-
osition. He could safely say for himself, and appeal to the
knowledge of his colleague for confirmation, that he had always
been opposed to a division of that county. He had seen no reason
to wish for a division, and until he did he would always oppose it.
He could say the same of his venerable colleague, on his left (Mr.
C. Edwards). Both himself and Mr. Edwards, although at this
time and always heretofore opposed to any division, were yet
willing that a majority of that or any other county in the state
should say whether a division should be had or not. He was un-
willing to place any such restriction upon the right of the people
to judge as to whether a division of their county should be made,
or where their county seat should be located. These were matters
not for constitutional restriction or arrangement, but of a proper
character to be judged of and decided by the people whose con-
venience, means and business made them interested. He had
heard several gentlemen upon this floor regret that the state of
Illinois had been cut up into so many small counties, and urged

830 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

that fact as a reason why a restriction should be placed upon them
in future. He fully believed, and was ready to say with those
gentlemen, that it was an evil, but, at the same time, one which
it was now too late to remedy. At the time of the adoption of
the present constitution, in 1818, had a provision of the character
reported by the committee under instructions from the Convention
been inserted in the constitution, there is no doubt but that it had been
far better for our state, and would have been the means of
saving a large amount of money, which has been required to sus-
tain so many separate organizations. But, now that the evil had
been done, it is proposed to apply the remedy. The state now
contains 99 or 100 counties, and in all that number there were not
more than half a dozen that could ever be divided, should the
section just adopted be allowed to stand as a constitutional pro-
vision. He urged that the adoption of his amendment would be
nothing more than an act of justice to those counties on the navi-
gable waters of the state, by allowing them, when a majority of
the qualified voters of such counties should desire, to place their
county seat upon the river, even at a less distance than ten miles
from the county line. If the wants, business facilities, and neces-
sities of the people are always to be governed by the geographical
centre, or by county lines, then, indeed, the proposed amendment
would be unnecessary; but so long as the markets for the produce
of the country, and a population more dense, are found upon the
rivers, it is but right and just that the people should have the
liberty of establishing their county seats where their local views,
facilities for business, and general intercourse, might dictate. He,
therefore, hoped that gentlemen representing counties bordering
and having county seats upon the river would support the amend-
ment he proposed, and not attempt, under color of remedying an
evil which is beyond our reach, to do manifest injustice to those
counties which had not participated in the matters complained of.
The gentleman from Jo Daviess (Mr. Campbell) has seen fit
to say, in the course of his speech, that the proposition now under
discussion has been introduced for the future benefit of Alton,
and that Alton is always seeking for something at every session
of the Legislature. Coming as it does from that gentleman, above
all others on this floor, representing the county of Jo Daviess, and

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 831

himself a resident of Galena, it comes with a very bad grace. He
(Mr. B.) being the only delegate from Madison county who re-
sided in the city of Alton, hoped he would not be considered out
of the way in saying a few words in reply. He said that Alton
was thankful for any favors she had received, and had made a
sufficient return to the state for any favor which had been extended
to her. When it is recollected that Mr. Campbell himself, and
others of his county, besieged the Legislature of the state, time
after time, for the purpose of impeaching the judge of the circuit
in which he resides, and after having spent several thousand
dollars of the people's money in such efforts but without success,
came gravely forward and asked the Legislature to give them a
county court, as their feelings would not allow them to practice
in the circuit court. It was not even pretended, so far as he
knew, that the circuit court could not do the business of the county.
They obtained the court, and the state now pays the heavy ex-
penses of its judge, attorney and jurors merely to save those
gentlemen's feelings.

Mr. CAMPBELL explained and said, that the whole expense
only amounted to $250.

Mr. BROWN replied that he did not know what the expense
was, but he thought it was more than the amount stated. The
course of the city of Alton was very different. When the business
of Madison county, in 1837, had increased to such an extent that
the circuit court was unable to get through with it, the city of
Alton asked for a municipal court, with concurrent jurisdiction,
and agreed to pay the expenses of a separate judge, prosecuting
attorney, and all other court expenses. She obtained her court,
and was thus enabled to accomplish her business. How different,
then, was her course from that of Galena, or Jo Daviess county!
He thought it was only necessary to mention these facts, to show
with what a bad grace the charge came from the gentleman from
Jo Daviess.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that he was opposed to
the amendment. If it prevailed it would completely nuUify the
most important and the most saving principles contained in the
first section, which had been adopted. Why, sir, what will it lead
to? To the complete nuUification of that provision, that no

832 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

county seat shall be established within ten miles of any county
line. There is scarcely a stream of any kind in the state, which
has not, at some time or another, been declared by the Legislature
to be navigable, and if this amendment of the gentleman from
Madison prevails, then in almost every county the county seat
will be removed to these streams, and the whole purpose of the
first section would be defeated. It would appear from the source
whence this amendment came that its object was to benefit Alton
at some future time. He had no hostility to Alton, but was proud
to see her growing and increasing; but he desired to see her ad-
vance without the aid of laws and constitutional provisions,
which, while they were calculated to be of advantage to her, were
vastly prejudicial to the other sections of the state. The gentle-
man last up had told us that Galena has occupied some of the
time of the Legislature, as well as Alton; that bills for the erection
of a court there had been before the Legislature, and that there
are appropriations made annually to pay for her municipal court.
Well, sir, it is true, we have a municipal court there, but it was
only called for when necessity demanded it, and the expense to
the state is but ^250 a year. Look at Alton — not a session of the
Legislature passes by, sir, but there are demands made upon the
state to pay for committees to examine into, or for appropriations
for, the expenses of her penitentiary or repairs, &c.

Mr. BROWN explained, that the people of Alton had nothing
to do with the penitentiary; it was not built for their benefit; it
was erected for the whole state, and Galena had her share of its
occupants.

Mr. CAMPBELL replied, that he knew that it was not built
for the benefit of Alton, but from the anxiety always manifested
by the members from that place, in relation to it, he considered
the city somewhat interested in the appropriations made for it.
Mr. C. earnestly hoped the amendment would not be adopted.
It would defeat all the good that we had done in the first section,
and upset all the benefits we looked for so confidently from its
results. That there was anxiety felt by those who opposed it
was manifest, that they desired to carry out the private and local
interests they represented was clear; and he hoped the Convention
would frown down all efforts to benefit particular portions of the

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 833

state to the injury of others. This anxiety was manifest from the
language and acts of the member whom we had chosen for our
president; manifest from his speech to-day, and from the
character of the committee he had selected to act on this subject.
He has shown to us that he is the representative of a few persons
in his county who desire to break up old county lines and sub-
stitute others. He was speaker of the House of Representatives
of the last Legislature, and as such used every means in his power,
and all the influence of his position, to carry through his favorite
scheme. We find him here again in this Convention — its Presi-
dent— struggling and urging with all possible energy the same
isolated and local measure. Has this Convention met for the
purpose of carrying out the objects and aims of local matters?
Have we elected our President with a view that he might use his
position for that purpose? No, sir. We have assembled for a
higher purpose; we have assembled to adopt such provisions as
may best suit the whole people. This section now before us will
carry out that view, and we should adopt it. We should throw
aside all local, private and personal views, and adopt such as will
benefit the people of the whole state.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison warmly repelled the attack upon
Alton, and advocated the adoption of the amendment.

Mr. SMITH moved the previous question; which was ordered.

Mr. BROWN said, he desired his amendment should be tested
on its own merits, and not to be endangered by the section to
which it was to be attached. He inquired, therefore, of the chair
if he could not withdraw it now, and offer it afterwards as an
additional section.

The CHAIR replied that he could do so.

Mr. BROWN withdrew his amendment.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the second
section, and it was adopted.

The Convention then took up the first section of the report
of the majority of said committee, as follows:

Section i. No new county shall be established by the Legis-
lature which shall reduce the county or counties from which it is
taken, or either of them, to less contents than four hundred square
miles, nor shall any county be estabhshed of less contents, unless

834 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

it shall contain within its prescribed limits four thousand inhab-
itants, nor shall such new county be organized until a majority of
the qualified voters within its prescribed limits, at some election
held for that purpose, shall have voted in favor of such organization.

Mr. BROWN offered the amendment, just withdrawn, as an
amendment to this section, to follow it as a separate section.

Pending which the Convention adjourned.

AFTERNOON

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison moved to suspend the rules to
enable him to make a motion that the committee on Revision be
authorized to employ a clerk. Granted, and the motion was
agreed to.

The question pending at the adjournment was on the
amendment offered by Mr. Brown, and it was taken thereon, and
the amendment was rejected.

Mr. WILLIAMS offered, as a substitute for the section, the
following:

"All territory which has been or may be stricken off, by leg-
islative enactment, from any organized county or counties, for
the purpose of forming a new county, and such new county shall
remain unorganized after the period enacted for such organization
to take place, then such territory, so stricken off, shall be and
remain a part and portion of the county, or counties, from which
it was originally taken, for all purposes of county and state gov-
ernment, and to participate in all the immunities thereof, until
otherwise provided by law."

Messrs. Williams, Singleton, Simpson, Davis of Montgom-
ery, Brockman and Powers discussed the amendment in its bear-
ings upon the county of Highland. All were in favor of the
amendment; but disagreed as to the feelings of the people of High-
land towards the counties of Brown and Adams.

Mr. SINGLETON offered the following, to be added thereto:

"The Legislature may, upon the appUcation of a majority of
the legal voters of any district of country, attach said district to
any other county, or form a new county; Provided, the county
lines are not thereby so altered as to run within ten miles of any
county seat previously established."

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 835

The question was taken thereon by yeas and nays, and re-
sulted— yeas 2S-> nays 96.

The substitute of Mr. Williams was then adopted.

Mr. MARKLEY offered, as an amendment, the same prop-
osition offered by him in the morning, and which was then
rejected.

Mr. WEAD opposed the amendment, which, he said, had for
its object the division of Fulton county.

The question was then taken by yeas and nays on the amend-
ment, and it was rejected — yeas 62, nays 65.

Mr. TUTTLE offered, as an additional section, the following:

"There shall be no territory stricken from any county unless
a majority of all the voters living in such territory shall petition
for such division."

[Mr. TUTTLE said: Mr. President — I am among those who
have not troubled this convention much with long speeches, nor
would I now trespass on their patience, but that I feel myself
bound to support the adoption of this section. A similar amend-
ment to that now offered was unceremoniously laid on the table,
this morning, and it seems to me that it was for want of proper
consideration on the subject. I conceive this amendment to be
of great importance, as great injustice has been done in many
instances; among which is that of Highland county, which was
taken off Adartis, contrary to the wishes of the people living in
the territory so divided off; and in consequence the people have
refused to organize, and persist in their refusal. The territory on
which I live, also, was stricken off DeWitt County, with every
voter living in that territory remonstrating against it. These
two instances, Mr. President, are sufficient, in my mind, to show
that great injustice may be done, without some such provision as
this. If a county. Sir, either for political or local purposes, can
detach any portion without the consent of a majority of the free-
holders living in such territory, it appears to me to leave great
room for a county containing 400 square miles to do great in-
justice to the extremes of the county. I know that my constitu-
ents will have cause to complain without some such provision as
I have the honor to offer.

836 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Some gentlemen say it is not likely that any county would do
so. We see it has been done; and may be done again, hence, this
provision is offered, to prevent it in future without the expressed
consent of the people affected by it. I hope that every gentleman
on this floor will see the justice of this amendment, and vote for
its adoption.]^*

Mr. LEMON offered as an amendment thereto:

"No territory shall be added to any county without the con-
sent of the county to which it is added."

Both of which were adopted, and the section, as amended, was
then adopted.

Sec. 2. No county seat shall be removed until the point to
which it is proposed to be removed shall be fixed by law, and a
majority of the qualified voters of the county shall have voted in
favor of its removal to such point.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to add thereto:

"The Legislature shall, at the next session after the adoption
of this constitution, proceed to lay off the state into sixty counties,
as nearly in a square form as practicable; and when so laid off
shall be permanently established.

"Sec. — . The foregoing section shall be voted upon sepa-
rately at the election of adoption of this constitution, and if it shall
receive a majority of all the votes cast for and against it,
shall be a permanent provision, and supersede all others coming
in conflict with the same.' '

Mr. SHIELDS moved the previous question; which was
seconded.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the amendment,
and resulted — yeas 29, nays 99.

The 2d section was then adopted.

The balance of the reports were laid on the table, and the
sections adopted were referred to the committee on Revision.

Mr. WOODSON moved to take up the report. No. 2, of the
committee on Law Reform. Carried.

The Convention then took up the report, and, after a slight
amendment offered by Mr. Brown, it was adopted, as follows:

''This speech by Tuttle is taken from the Sangamo Journal, August 24.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 20, 1847 837

PREAMBLE

We, the people of the state of Illinois, in order to form a more
perfect government, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to our-
selves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this con-
stitution for the state of Illinois.

Sec. I. The boundaries and jurisdiction of the state shall
continue to be as follows, to-wit: Beginning at the mouth of the
Wabash river; thence up the same, and with the line of Indiana,
to the north-west corner of said state; thence east, with the line
of the same state, to the middle of lake Michigan; thence north,
along the middle of said lake, to north latitude forty-two degrees
and thirty minutes; thence west to the middle of the Mississippi
river; and thence, down along the middle of that river, to its
confluence with the Ohio river; and thence up the latter river,
along its north-western shore, to the beginning.

Sec. I. The powers of the government of the state of Illinois
shall be divided into three distinct departments, and each of them
to be confided to a separate body of magistracy, to-wit: those
which are legislative, to one; those which are executive, to another;
and those which are judicial, to another.

Sec. 2. No person, or collection of persons, being one of
these departments, shall exercise any power properly belonging
to either of the others, except as hereinafter expressly directed or
permitted, and all acts in contravention of this section shall be
void.

Sec. 3. The Governor shall nominate and, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate (a majority of all the sen-
ators concurring) appoint all officers, whose offices are established
by this constitution, or which may be created by law, and whose
appointments are not otherwise provided for; and no such officers
shall be elected or appointed by the General Assembly; Provided,
further, that officers, whose jurisdiction and duties are confined

838 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

within the limits of a county, and whose appointments are not
otherwise provided for, shall be appointed in such manner as the
General Assembly shall prescribe.

Sec. 4. No person shall be elected or appointed to any office,
either civil or military, in this state who is not a citizen of the
United States, and who shall not have resided in this state one
year next before the election or appointment. Every person who
shall be chosen or appointed to any office of trust or profit, shall,
before entering upon the duties thereof, take an oath to support
the constitution of the United States and of this state, and also
an oath of office.

Mr. PETERS moved to take up the report of the special com-
mittee on townships. Carried.

Sections i and 2 were adopted, and section 3 was under con-
sideration, when the Convention adjourned till to-morrow at
8 a. m.

LXI. SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 1847

Mr. COLBY moved to suspend the rules, to enable him to
offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That 5,000 of the 50,000 copies of the constitution,
ordered to be printed, be printed in the German language.

Mr. GREGG said, that in reply to the enquiries of gentlemen,
he would state that there would be no difficulty in procuring the
printing of the new constitution in the German language. It had
been the practice, for several years past, to order the printing of
the executive messages in that language, and it was always
promptly done. There were several German presses in the state,
and gentlemen need be under no apprehension that they could
not be procured to execute our order.

He was in favor of a suspension of the rule to enable his col-
league to introduce his resolution. There was a large number of
Germans in our state, generally honest, intelligent and industrious,
but very many of them have not yet attained to a thorough
acquaintance with the English language. It was due to them
that they should be afforded the proper facilities to judge cor-
rectly of our action. We were submitting a new question of vast
importance, for the determination of the people, and they had a
right to demand the means of giving it a fair consideration. No
question of greater moment could be submitted to the popular
decision. It concerned not the present, merely, but the future.
The interests of generations yet to come, were involved. — Did,
then, the proposition of his colleague ask too much? Had not
our German population the right to insist upon the privilege of
examining the new constitution in their own mother tongue? It
had been intimated that the proposition of his colleague indicated
a consciousness of ignorance on the part of the Germans. It did
no such thing. He claimed that they possessed a fair amount
of intelligence, and had a reasonable knowledge of the principles of
our institutions — a much greater knowledge, he thought, than
many of those who insisted upon their ignorance. Did it neces-
839

840 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

sarily follow that men must be ignorant because they had not a
thorough knowledge of the English language ? Was all the wisdom
of the world locked up in that language ? Such was not his opinion.
The German might comprehend the spirit and character of our
institutions, and not know a word of English. He wished the
resolution to be adopted. It proposed nothing but justice, and he
trusted the Convention would see the propriety of affording an
opportunity to a large and worthy class of our inhabitants, of
weighing our action, and judging for themselves of the character
of the new fundamental law, submitted for their adoption.

Messrs. McCallen and Brockman opposed the resolution;
and Messrs. Roman, Colby and Markley supported it.

[Mr. ROMAN said, that from his peculiar position he felt
called upon to make a few remarks upon the subject. In the
first place, said Mr. R., I will state that one-third of the popula-
tion of the county in which I reside are Germans, most of whom
know nothing of our language. They are to be called on in a short
time to vote upon the adoption of this constitution.

Is it right, sir, to compel this class of citizens to vote upon
what they cannot possibly comprehend? I am informed that
there is a German press at Quincy, and there will be no difficulty
in having the requisite number printed in time to enable them to
vote understandingly on the subject.

I will remark to my friend from Harding, that if he is of opinion
that 1000 should be printed in wild Irish, I have no doubt the
gentleman would make a good translator, and I will cheerfully
recommend him for that office.

The gentleman seems perfectly familiar, from the specimens
he has given us, with the wild Irish and all other wild languages,
except the English.

Mr. ECCLES said — He thought if the convention would reflect
one moment, there could be no serious objection to the proposi-
tion. It would be recollected that there were at this time within
our borders several thousand Germans, who could not read the
English language, and who in a short time would be called on to
vote for or against the adoption of our constitution. As a general
rule he was opposed to making any inroads upon the English

SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 1847 841

language, but in a case like the present, where so much was in-
volved, as the adoption of an organic law; he thought an oppor-
tunity should be afforded to all to understand fully what they
were called upon to adopt or repeal. He should therefore support
the proposition.]^'

The question was then taken on suspending the rules, and
resulted — yeas 104. Carried.

Mr. HURLBUT moved to amend, that 1,000 be printed in
the Norwegian language.

Mr. BOND advocated the adoption of the resolution.

Mr. SERVANT opposed the resolution as a bad precedent.

Mr. PRATT hoped the amendment of the gentleman from
Boone would be adopted. There were many Norwegians in the
state, and he hoped the amendment would be adopted.

Mr. JAMES moved the previous question; which was seconded.

The yeas and nays were ordered on the amendment of Mr.
HuRLBUT and resulted — yeas 97, nays 47.

The question was then taken on the amendment as amended,
and resulted — yeas 113, nays 33.

Mr. McCALLEN moved a suspension of the rules to enable
him to offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That one thousand of the fifty thousand copies of
the constitution, ordered to be printed, be printed in the Irish
and French languages.

The yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted — yeas 46, nays
85.

Mr. LOGAN moved to reconsider the vote adopting a resolu-
tion to adjourn sine die on the 25th inst.

Mr. Z. CASEY suggested that it would be better to postpone
the reconsideration till Monday or Tuesday next. By that time
we can be able to fix the proper day.

Mr. LOGAN replied that there was scarcely any one present
who believed that the business could be disposed of by the 25th,
and the subject might as well be disposed of at once.

'« These remarks by Roman and Eccles are taken from the Sangamo
Journal, August 26.

842 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to postpone the motion to reconsider
till Monday next.

Mr. PINCKNEY asked for the reading of the resolution re-
stricting speeches to fifteen minutes. — He considered that a part
of it had been violated already, and therefore looked upon the
resolution now, as null and void.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean was in favor of reconsidering now.
He did not like to have the business rushed through in a hurry.
We should consider well everything we did, and not suffer our-
selves to fix a day of adjournment, and then have all the business
to do at the last hour. He hoped the reconsideration would be
had now.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess was in hopes that the recon-
sideration would take place now. — No one believed that the
Convention would remain in session one hour longer than neces-
sary, and why, then, have any time fixed for adjournment? The
most important part of the duty of the Convention was about to
be performed — the final adoption of the instrument, and the body
should not be hurried in its action. He was in hopes the reso-
lution would be reconsidered and rescinded, and that no time
would be fixed for the adjournment.

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau agreed with the gentleman from Jo
Daviess. He looked upon it as useless to fix any time for adjourn-
ment. We would not stay here a day longer than was necessary,
nor would we adjourn before the business that we came here to
perform was completed. Why, then, fix a time for adjournment?

Mr. Z. CASEY withdrew his motion to postpone the motion
to reconsider till Monday next.

And then the resolution was reconsidered.

Mr. LOGAN moved to strike out the 25th and insert 30th.

Mr. Z. CASEY thought, when he came here, that all were
prepared to carry retrenchment and reform into every branch of
the government, and to practise it ourselves. But it appeared
that such was not the case. He had listened to speeches here,
upon economy, that pleased him; but we had gone off into wild,
extravagant and useless debate, upon every subject, and had pro-
longed the session six weeks beyond the period when we should

SATURDAY, AUGUST 2t, 1847 843

have adjourned. He hoped all discussion would cease, and that
we would proceed to close the business as soon as practicable.

Mr. SIBLEY said, no one was more anxious to go home than
he; but he agreed with the gentleman from Jo Daviess, that there
was no use in fixing any limit. We could not go home till we had
done, and when that time came, he supposed there would be no ob-
jection to adjourn.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean replied to the gentleman from Jeffer-
son, and said that if anything more than another had tended to
prolong the session, and to retard the progress of the Convention,
it was that gentleman's interminable cry of adjourn! adjourn!
That gentleman, from whom we all expected so much, on account
of his age and experience, has kept quiet and silent in his seat;
has never given us the benefit of one single suggestion and has not
introduced a solitary provision which would redound to the honor
and glory of his state. Nothing but continual croaking, adjourn,
adjourn. He has deprecated the discussions that have taken place
here, and says they were wild and useless. Was this so? We
came here — one hundred and sixty-two men — all with views
differing upon almost every subject. An interchange of opinion
and sentiment was absolutely necessary, in order to arrive at any
agreement. We have all had to abandon our own particular
views to some extent, or else we could never agree upon a consti-
tution. There was not a single provision in the constitution, that
he, (Mr. Davis) approved of, taken by itself, yet he would support
the constitution as a whole, because it embraces those views
nearest his own that it was possible to get. In this way, we have
compromised the views of all the members of the Convention,
and it could only be done by a free and liberal discussion. During
the whole of this time, the gentleman from Jefferson has not said
one word on any of these subjects, has not opened his lips, has not
even made a suggestion that would enable us to approach a con-
clusion, save and except his eternal cry of adjournment. The
only thing that gentleman ever offered, was a resolution to adjourn
on the 30th of July last. Mr. D. hoped the Convention would
give full time to consider well what was going on, and not take
any hasty steps, which perhaps could not be retracted.

844 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. E. O. SMITH moved the previous question, which was
ordered.

The question was taken first on striking out "25th," and
decided unanimously in the affirmative. And then on inserting
"30th," by yeas and nays, and decided — yeas 58, nays 89.

The resolution (with a blank day) was adopted.

Mr. LOGAN moved to suspend the rules, to enable him to
offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That the President of the Convention make out, and
file with the Auditor, his certificate of the pay due to each member
and officer of the Convention up to the 30th inst.

Mr. Z. CASEY said that he was opposed to the resolution,
because if members were allowed now to draw their pay up to the
30th, in a few days we would have no quorum.

Mr. LOGAN then added to his resolution: "Provided that
the Auditor issue no such warrant until that time."

Messrs. Z. Casey, Knowlton, J. M. Davis and Caldwell
further discussed the resolution.

Mr. WITT moved to lay it on the table; yeas 36, nays not
counted.

And the resolution was adopted.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to reconsider the adoption
of a resolution, passed in June last, requiring the members to
certify, on honor, the number of days in attendance; and the same
was reconsidered, and laid on the table.

Mr. HAY asked a suspension of the rules, to offer a resolution
that no new business be taken up, &c. And the Convention refused
to suspend the rules.

Mr. GEDDES asked to suspend the rules, to offer the follow-
ing resolution:

Resolved, That this Convention would deprecate a precedent
of the kind, in the publication of any other document, but deeming
this the most important document that ever can come before the
people, have given their reluctant consent.

Mr. WHITNEY inquired what the ' 'document" was? If the
resolution was the "document", he would hardly give his "reluc-
tant consent" to its going "before the people" as the "most im-
portant" ever heard of.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 1847 845

Mr. GEDDES was understood to say, the resolution had
reference to the constitution, in the Norwegian language. The
Convention refused to suspend the rules.

The Convention then resumed the consideration of the report
of the select committee on the Organization of Townships &c.

The whole action of the Convention had yesterday was on
motion reconsidered.

Mr. WEAD presented the following as a substitute for the
report:

"The General Assembly shall provide, by a general law, that
the townships and parts of townships in the several counties of
this state may become incorporated for municipal and local pur-
poses by a vote of the majority of the qualified electors of such
county."

Mr. KNOWLTON offered as a substitute for Mr. Wead's
amendment the following, which was adopted:

"The Legislature shall provide by law, that the legal voters of
any county in this state may adopt a township form of govern-
ment within each county, by a majority of votes cast at any
general election within said county."

The section was then finally adopted by yeas and nays — yeas
87, nays 52.

And the report of the committee was laid on the table.

Mr. CALDWELL moved to add to the section the following,
which was adopted:

"Provided, That the Legislature may, by the consent of the state
of Kentucky, provide for concurrent jurisdiction on the river Ohio
as far as the same is a boundary of this state, or in the
event the state of Kentucky shall consent that the jurisdiction of
this state shall extend to the middle or some other suitable line
along said river, as far as the same is a boundary of this state.' '

The whole was then referred to the committee on Revision.

Mr. WOODSON moved to take up the report of the committee
on the Bill of Rights; which motion prevailed.

Sections one and two were read and adopted — when

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey moved to go into committee of the
whole on the report.

846 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Messrs. Lemon and Allen opposed the motion. Messrs.
Church and McCallen supported it.

And the question being taken by yeas and nays, the motion
was rejected — yeas 62, nays 65.

And then the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. THOMAS moved to reconsider the vote adopting the
two sections of the report; and the motion prevailed— yeas 77,
nays not counted.

Mr. THOMAS moved to lay the report on the table and take
up the old bill of rights (the 8 th article of the present constitution.)

Messrs. Constable and Knapp of Jersey opposed the motion
and Messrs. Thomas, Thornton, Scates and Gregg supported it.
And the motion was carried — yeas 88, nays not counted.

The old bill of rights was taken up and considered section by
section.

Section one was adopted.

Mr. HAYES moved to add to the section — "and they have
the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the
public good may require it."

Mr. CALDWELL moved to insert in the amendment, after
the word reform — "or abolish."

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison opposed the amendment. The
Legislature, under the provision, might hereafter assume the
power, as representatives of the people, to set the constitution at
defiance, and proceed to change or abolish the government, and
show, as their authority, this provision in the bill of rights.

Mr. CALDWELL replied that the bill of rights was nothing
more than an enumeration of certain natural rights that belonged
to men, and in those rights it could not be denied were included the
power to change, alter or abolish any form of government under
which they were. The words contained in the amendment are
expressly used in the declaration of independence. He could not
see any possibility of such a case as stated by the gentleman from
Madison, of the Legislature ever drawing from this mere declara-
tion of the power to exist in the people, any authority to change the
government. On the contrary this declaration of rights was a

SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 1847 847

restraint upon the Legislature. It declared the powers enumerated
to be in the people alone, and therefore was a restraint upon any
branch of the government exercising powers which were acknowl
edged to be vested solely in the people. All these provisions in
the bill of rights are intended as restraints upon government
in the exercise of their powers.

Mr. HAYES said, he agreed with the gentleman just up, and
would vote for his amendment. He could not accept it, as he
desired his own to be tested. If the Convention added it, he would
gladly vote for it.

Mr. GREGG advocated the amendment and read the follow-
ing extract from the declaration of independence:

"We hold these truths to be self evident — that all men are
created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments
are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government
becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to
ALTER or to ABOLISH it, and to institute a new government, laying
its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in
such form as to them shall seem most Hkely to effect their safety
and happiness."

Mr. HAYES accepted the amendment as part of his own.

Mr. HARVEY moved, as he said to show how ridiculous the
provision would read in the constitution, to add to the amend-
ment— "in conformity to the mode prescribed by this constitution."

Mr. CALDWELL said, that he regretted his feeble health
which would not permit him to address the Convention upon the
subject. He was surprised to hear the gentleman from Knox, or
any man professing his political opinions asserting such a principle
as that the people had no right to change or abolish their govern-
ment, save in that mode laid down by ; the 'government. The
right of the people to change or abolish their government has been
recognized and acknowledged by all men. It has never been dis-
puted by those who'acknowledge'^all power to'be'derived from the
governed. But lately, the principle contained in the gentleman's
amendment has been asserted, and an attempt was made to en-

848 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

force it in the state of Rhode Island, where they denied the people
the power to change the government, except as prescribed by the
charter. Men were then found who asserted the natural rights
of man, and for so doing they were seized, tried and imprisoned,
and this by men whose principles are the same as those asserted
by the gentleman from Knox. Men who claimed for the people,
the right of instituting a government of their own and of throwing
off the obnoxious charter of Charles, were seized, imprisoned and
branded as traitors. Mr. C. said, his strength would not allow
him to proceed.

The question was taken on Mr. Harvey's amendment, and it
was rejected — yeas 45, nays 68.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin thought the amendment unneces-
sary. He considered the section as it stood as containing every-
thing that was desirable. ' 'All power is in the people.' ' Did not
this secure everything which the gentleman's amendment called
for? That the people had the right to change or abolish the
government was unquestionable. But in what way? What mode
did the gentleman desire to express by the amendment? If, by
the amendment, he intends to assert that the people have the
moral right to overturn the government, without regard to the
constitution, without regard to all the private rights of man, with-
out regard to the rights of minorities, and all those other sacred
rights secured among men, than he was not in favor of the amend-
ment, because it asserts a political heresy. He considered the
amendment as useless. We are not a young state. We have had
a government for years, and the people are familiar with the old
Bill of Rights. They have lived under it for thirty years, and have
never complained of it, why, then, introduce this amendment?
We have not met here as political doctors, for the purpose of apply-
ing political remedies by way of experiment for diseases that have
never been complained of. Let gentlemen apply themselves to
the cure of evils under which the people do suffer, and leave off
doctoring on subjects where no complaint has ever existed.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to strike out "abolish."

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess was disposed to favor the
amendment. He 'believed that all power was in the people, de-
rived from them, and delegated by them to those appointed as

SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 1847 849

their governors. He believed that they had a right to change or
abolish the form of that government. Suppose, for instance, that
this Convention were to repeal the old constitution, and adjourn
without forming another, would not the government of the state
of Illinois be abolished? If the people have the power to alter
or change this constitution, they have, by the same right, the
power to abolish it entirely. If they desire it, they have the same
power and right to abolish the government entirely, as they have
to change it in one single point. If this be so, what becomes of
the objections to the amendment? They have, then, a right to
do away with the government altogether, and substitute any
other form of government, provided it be republican. The denial
of this right, and the assertion of the principle that the people
had no power to abolish or change their government, except by
that mode pointed out by the government itself, and by its will
and consent, was the doctrine of the federalists in Rhode Island
where they resisted the efforts of the people to establish a demo-
cratic government. This odious doctrine was the cause of the
trouble in that state where federalism and federalists ruled with
on iron hand the people, and crushed by its means the upright
republican spirit of the masses. To sustain this principle, they
manacled the champion of the people, and branded him as a traitor.
Were gentlemen disposed to inculcate or preach this doctrine in
Illinois? If so, and if he was not much mistaken, they would find
to their cost that such tyrannical and federal sentiments met with
no response in the free people here. The federal leaders in Rhode
Island denied the right of the people to change their government,
until they conformed with the charter. The democratic party
there, and everywhere else they were sustained, argued that the
people, though they have yielded up certain powers for the pur-
poses of government, have a perfect right to resume that power,
and to change or abolish that government and to substitute another
whenever it may suit them so to do. This was the democratic
doctrine there, was democratic doctrine here, and was recognised
by all except those federalists of Rhode Island, and their kindred
spirits all over the country.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell replied, and defended Rhode Island
from the charge of federalism.

850 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. ARMSTRONG withdrew his motion.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, that in looking at this ques-
tion he differed from some of the gentlemen. He laid it down as
a fact that the people of the state of Illinois, having once formed
a government, had the power to abolish that government; but
that they could exercise this power in two ways only. The first
was, to abolish or change it in that manner and mode pointed out
by the constitution itself; and the other was, by a revolution.
This was his view of the matter. Did gentlemen reflect to what
lengths their arguments carried them? Was it possible that when
they advanced the doctrine that the poeple had the right at any
time to change the government, they fully apprehended what the
principle was that they advocated? When he returned to Bond
county, he would tell Mr. Waite that on the floor of this Conven-
tion there are gentlemen from the north who scout repudiation as
a monster, but who are boldly advocating the very same doctrine
that he is advocating in that county on the stump. He would
tell him that in this Convention there are men who are proclaim-
ing to the world that the people have the power and the right, at
any moment, to rise, overturn the government, break through all
its obligations, erect another government, destroy every solemn
engagement entered into by their rulers, and at one fell swoop
wipe out the whole state indebtedness. He would tell him that
there were men here who, though not in words, yet beneath the
principle contained in this amendment, were contending stren-
uously for the very doctrine of repudiation which that gentleman
so openly advanced.

Mr. GREGG. Will the gentleman from Montgomery allow
me to explain? I can set him right as to my views.

Mr. DAVIS. Let me alone, sir. When I have got through
you may explain.

Mr. GREGG. I will let you alone; but I have a right to ex-
plain when you misrepresent me.

Mr. DAVIS. I have not misrepresented you. If you say I
have, then you say that which is not true.

Mr. GREGG. Well you do misrepresent me.

Mr. DAVIS. Then you lie.

Mr. GREGG. And you are a liar.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 1847 851

Mr. DAVIS, (much excited, advanced a step towards Mr. G.
and took up a glass containing water from the desk before him, as
if to throw at Mr. G. and then put it down again and) said, that
he had not misstated what the position of the member from Cook
was. The ground had been taken here that the people had a
right to break up the government at pleasure, that in so doing
they would destroy that government, violate its contracts, and
send its creditors away without any power or government from
whom they could demand their just debts. This he said, was the
doctrine advanced by the repudiators, and he said so still.

So far as this difficulty was concerned he would settle that with
the member from Cook, as soon as the Convention adjourned.
He would have that matter disposed of at once. They would not
go to St. Louis to settle the question. He had not charged any
one with repudiation, but the doctrine was the same, whether
advanced by repudiators on the stump or by men with gold templed
spectacles here. .He would trouble the Convention no longer.

Mr. LOGAN could see no necessity for any excitement on the
subject. Gentlemen all agreed that the people had the power
to abolish the government, and only differed as to how that
power was to be executed and really saw no necessity for any excite-
ment on the subject. He did not approve of putting this provision
in the constitution, as it was one tending to destroy a constitution.
The people had the power but there was no necessity for this pro-
vision.

Mr. CALDWELL rose to bring about an explanation, but Mr.
Davis left the hall.

Mr. CONSTABLE agreed with Mr. Logan, that the people
had the power, but doubted the expediency of inserting it in the
constitution.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon, advocated the amendment at
some length, and cited the constitutions of nearly all the states in
the Union to sustain it.

Mr. KITCHELL offered as a substitute for the amendment
and the section the following, which was accepted by Mr. Hayes:

"That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their peace, safety and happiness; for the advancement of these

852 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

ends they have an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter,
reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may
think proper.' '

Mr. HAYES defended the amendment, and pointed out the
difference between its principle, and the principle of repudiation.
We are compelled from want of room to omit his remarks.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, he rose for two purposes, one
to say something in explanation of what had occurred, and the
other to offer a few words upon the question. He did not intend
to make any apology for what had occurred. But he knew he
was of an excitable temperament and often said things that were
wrong. He desired to say what he had said in the course of his
remarks when up last. (Mr. D. here repeated exactly what he
had said down to the time of the interruption.) This was what
he had said, and he said so still. He had said in connection with
what others had said, as to the power of the people and their right
to abolish a government at will, that a gentleman in Bond county,
well known there for his talent, and the perseverance with which
he followed the subject of repudiation, had taken the same ground
as to the doctrine of repudiation, and advocated the same princi-
ple. He did not when he had said this, desire to be misunderstood
so far as to charge the gentleman from Cook with being a repudi-
ator. He knew him to be no repudiator. They had been in the
legislature together, and he knew him to entertain no such views.
He did not believe there was a single man on this floor who enter-
tained views of repudiation, but he had alluded to the fact merely
to show that the doctrine was the same.

Mr. D. then entered into the discussion of the amendment and
in reply to the member from Jo Daviess.

Mr. GREGG rose and said, that it was due to himself and due
to the Convention that he should make some few remarks upon
the difficulty that has taken place and upon the question now
before us. He had understood the gentleman from Montgomery
as charging him in distinct terms, with entertaining the doctrines
of repudiation, which he scorned and held in abhorrence above
every thing. He rose to explain that such were not his views, when
that gentleman told him to let him alone. Under some excitement,
caused perhaps by that member's manner, he told him he should

SATURDAY, AUGUST 21, 1847 853

not misrepresent him. In answer to which was applied an epithet
that he felt bound to retort. He considered that the member
from Montgomery had represented him as holding the doctrines
of the repudiators, but was satisfied from what had fallen from
the member just now, and from what his friends around him
assured him was the fact, that such was not the case, and he was
led to believe that he had not been so represented.

Mr. G. then addressed the Convention in favor of the amend-
ment.

Mr. SCATES and Mr. KNAPP continued the discussion upon
other points, and

Mr. ROBBINS moved the previous question, which was
ordered.

And the question being taken, by yeas and nays, on the amend-
ment of Mr. Hayes, it was rejected — yeas 50, nays 74.

The second section was adopted.

The Convention adjourned till Monday morning, at 10 o'clock,

A. M.

LXII. MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Palmer of Marshall.

Mr. DALE asked a suspension of the rules to enable him to
present a petition; and the rules were suspended.

He then presented the petition of James Stafford and 32 others,
of Bond county, praying that constitutional provision be made for
the appointment of a general superintendent of common schools;
which petition was read.

Mr. D. moved that, as the committee on Education had
already reported, the petition be laid on the table, to be considered
when the committee's report shall be taken up.

Mr. HAY moved a suspension of the rules to enable him to
offer a resolution; and the Convention refused to suspend the
rules.

The Convention resumed the consideration of the old Bill of
Rights.

Section 3 was adopted as follows:

Sec. 3. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to
worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own con-
sciences; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect,
or support any place of worship, or to sustain any ministry against
his consent; that no human authority can in any case whatever
control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no pref-
erence shall ever be given by law to any religious establishments
or modes of worship.

Sec. 4. That no religious test shall ever be required as a quali-
fication to any office or public trust under this state.

Mr. BALLINGALL moved as a substitute therefor the follow-
ing:

"No rehgious test shall be required as a qualification for any
office or public trust, and no person shall be deprived of any of his
rights, privileges or capacities, or disqualified from the perform-
ance of any of his public or private duties, or rendered incompetent
854

MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 855

to give evidence in any court of law or equity, in consequence of
his opinions on the subject of religion."

Mr. GEDDES moved to lay the substitute on the table; on
which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and it was decided
in the affirmative — 92 yeas, 42 nays.

Mr. THORNTON moved to amend the section by adding the
following: "And that the civil rights, privileges or capacities
of any citizen shall in no-wise be diminished or enlarged on
account of his religion."

Mr. JENKINS offered the following as a substitute for the
section and amendment; which was rejected.

"No person who shall deny the being of a God, or who shall
hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom or safety
of the state, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust
or profit in the civil department of this state."

Mr. ECCLES offered the following as a substitute for the
amendment:

"No person denying the existence of a Supreme Being, or a
future state of rewards or punishments, shall be a competent wit-
ness in any court in this state."

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to lay the amendments on the
table; and they were laid on the table.

The section was then adopted.

Sec. 5. That elections shall be free and equal.

Mr. BOND offered, as an additional section, the following:

Sec. — . The Legislature shall, at its first session under the
amended constitution, pass such laws as will effectually prohibit
free persons of color, from immigrating to and settling in this
state; and to effectually prevent the owners of slaves, or any other
person, from the introduction of slaves into this state for the pur-
pose of setting them free; Provided, that when this constitution
is submitted to the people of this state for their adoption or re-
jection, the foregoing shall be voted on separately as a section of
said constitution; and, if a majority of all the votes cast for and
against the same shall be for its adoption, then and in that case
the same shall form a section of the new constitution, but if a
majority shall be against its adoption, then the same shall be
rejected.

8s6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. SINGLETON offered the following as a substitute there-
for:

' 'No negro or mulatto shall hereafter be permitted to acquire
and exercise any civil or political rights, or residence within this
state; and the migration or introduction of all persons usually
denominated negroes or mulattoes into the state, is hereby forever
prohibited; and the Legislature shall at their first session, provide
such adequate penalties as will secure the fullest operation of the
foregoing provisions. This section shall be submitted to the
people for their ratification or rejection, and to be voted upon as
a separate section, and if more votes be cast for its adoption than
against it, it shall become a part of the constitution of this state."

Mr. WHITNEY was surprised that such an abhorrent prop-
osition should be introduced into a constitutional Convention
in the state of Illinois, in this enlightened age of civilization,
humanity, and Christianity. Were gentlemen serious when they
propose to us to engraft such a cruel and abhorrent proposition
in the constitution? If the brightest seraph that stands at the
foot-stool of the great Jehovah were to descend, by the order of
his master, and tell him that this constitution, in all other respects,
was the most perfect production of human intellect and this pro-
vision were placed in it, he would place his right arm in a blaze
and burn it to the shoulder, [rather] than suffer it to be the instrument
in depositing a ballot in favor of the constitution. What new light
had broken on Illinois that in this day of civilization and humanity,
we were called upon to adopt, in our fundamental law, a provision
that would disgrace the code of any government — the most des-
potical. He believed that the friends of the measure would be
able to carry it here, and carry it before the people, but did they
not endanger the constitution by it? Would not those who
feared and abhorred this provision, when once satisfied that it
would pass, in order to save the character of the state from shame
and obloquy in the face of the world, all vote against the consti-
tution?

[Mr. WHITNEY of Boone, rose and thus addressed the
chair: Mr. President, — The few minutes allowed for debate, by
the rules of this convention, precludes me from an investigation

MONDAY, AUGUST 33, 1847 857

of the subject under consideration; and I arise only to express my
astonishment, at the introduction of the section and the proposed
substitute, and my abhorrence of the principles they propose to
incorporate into the organic law of the State.

On this question I find myself singularly situated: compelled
by principle to pursue a course that will brand me here as an
abolitionist, while I know my own constituents, of every political
cast, consider me anything but a political abolitionist.

I am not wanting in kind feeling and sympathy for the people
in the southern portion of this State, nor of this nation; and I
believe that misapprehension prevails among our brethren of the
south in regard to the real sentiments entertained by the North;
or such a section would never have been proposed to disgrace the
constitution of the State of Illinois.

And here in a few words I propose to define, now and forever,
my position on the question of slavery and all laws aflPecting the
colored race; and what I understand to be the position of the
North on this exciting subject.

We hold it to be the right, the duty of the citizens of every
state, on all occasions and under all circumstances, by all reason-
able and just means, to oppose the extension and perpetuity of
slavery and its attendant evils; and the duty of every citizen of
this boasted land of freedom, to oppose the existence of slavery
in all the territories under the jurisdiction of the general govern-
ment, and the further acquisition of slave territory, and to employ
all constitutional means for confining slavery and slave laws,
with all their attendant ^/fjJZK^j' and f«rj^j to the States in which
slavery now exists.

I listened with attention to arguments of members on this
subject, some week since; I heard their dolorous complaints of
certain counties in the State being overrun with an idle and
vicious colored population; and I then believed, and now believe,
they told the truth. But sir, when they told us of the evils, did
they tell us that efforts had been put forth to elevate these unfor-
tunate persons in the scale of being? No sir, no. No one told
us that the Gospel had been carried among them; that schools
had been established for their improvement; nor that any means
of intellectual culture had been put within their reach. Hence

858 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the cause of the evils is obvious and their parentage certain; and
equally obvious and certain are the means of cure.

Mr. President, the spirit of fanaticism and misguided zeal on
this subject is passing away, and the spirit of liberty, humanity
and philanthropy, is seeking its natural and healthful channels;
but is sending its currents deep and strong through all the Northern
soil!

And it is not sufficient for me that a separate submission of this
section is proposed. It is wrong in principle; it is in violence of
truth, justice and humanity, and I am opposed to its going forth
to the world in any form, the inhuman and crowning error of this
august assembly.

The report from the committee on the bill of rights, for which
this substitute is proposed, incorporates the principles, contained
in the substitute, into the constitution without a separate sub-
mission to the people.

It has, Mr. President, been frequently and tauntingly remarked
on this floor, of several of the small counties, that they are not
of the State of Illinois. This has been gratuitously said of the
county I have the honor in part, to represent. Now, sir, I do not
claim that the county of Boone exercises any very considerable in-
fluence in the State, nor do I claim to exercise any controlling
influence over that county; but I thank Heaven there is one vote
in that county I do control; and it is of that vote I speak when I
declare before Him that lives forever and ever — and I call Heaven
and earth to record; that if the highest Seraph that waits before
the Omniscient Throne should descend, and declare to me that
all of the constitution, beside, was as perfect as human ingenuity
and wisdom could make it, I would doom my hand to the flames
before it should bear to the polls a vote for a constitution embrac-
ing the principles contained in the section now under considera-
tion.

And it should not be thought strange that a few of the mem-
bers of this convention, who were raised in States that have long
since wiped the foul blot of slavery from their constitutions, and
from their statute books all laws that oppress the colored race,
should express, by their votes, their abhorrence of the base prop-
osition on which we are now called to deliberate. Nor should

MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 859

honorable gentlemen be surprised to find that some of us who have
been, from our infancy, accustomed to hear the 4th of July break
from valley, from hill side, and mountain top, with

' 'My native country, thee.

Sweet land of liberty!

Of thee I sing.

Land where my fathers died.

Land of the Pilgrim's pride.

From every mountain side

"L&t freedom ring"
should by our votes, on this question declare our eternal opposi-
tion to injustice and oppression. Nor should they be surprised
that a few of us, who in childhood were pointed to that proud era
when the heroes of '76 flung to the breeze the standard sheet, and
the bird of Jove soared from her tempest rocked eyrie on the
mountain pine and perched upon its ample folds — that we who
have been taught, and believe, the doctrine proclaimed by the
Continental Congress in a voice that shook the political universe,
"That all mankind are created equal and are endowed by their
Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;" dare, amid the whirlwind
of slavery that is this hour raging through this convention, record
our votes against the inhuman principles of the section before us,
let them be presented when, and in whatever form, they may.
Numbers may triumph, and this convention may, and undoubt-
edly will, declare by an overwhelming majority that humanity,
truth and justice are strangers to the State. Yet, sir, I believe
that truth is omnipotent and will ultimately prevail; and though,
"Crushed to earth she will rise again;
The eternal years of God are her's.
While error, wounded, writhes in pain.
And dies amid her worshipers."
And I thank God that I am this day well enough to be in my
seat; and I thank Him for the opportunity I have, standing in
the Capitol, amidst the assembled wisdom of the State, — the free
representative of a free constituency, to declare of this section,
by my vote, "out damned spot, out I say." And though I may
be forced, from surrounding circumstances, to the painful con-

86o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

viction that the day that brings justice and freedom to the colored
man is far away, — yet believing that the Throne of the Universe
is not filled by a vindictive Being who delights to wreathe his
brow with oppression and human misery — I look down the dark
vista of coming years, and behold the dawn of the auspicious day,
"When prone to the dust oppression shall be hurled,
Her name, her nature, withered from the world."]"

Mr. AKIN said, that he understood this was a compromise
question, and also understood that there was to be no debate;
therefore, he moved the previous question.

At the urgent request of many gentlemen, the call for the
previous question was withdrawn.

Mr. McCALLEN said, that he was not prepared to travel
over the broad field of poesy that the gentleman from Boone had
traversed, but would take a less beautiful, but a more common
sense view of the subject. One would suppose from the remarks
of the gentleman, that the stars that gem the heavens, and shine
like brilliants in the canopy above, if this proposition be passed,
would be blotted out; that the heavenly bodies would be obscured,
that the evolutions of the globe and all the luminaries of creation
would be stopped still in their orbits, and all nature would be
reduced to one chaos of darkness and deep obscurity. What an
awful state of affairs! He believed no such thing, but would say
to those gentlemen that the people of the south would not suffer
the evils and vices attendant on a negro population any longer.
He warned gentlemen that the south had borne with them long
enough — had suffered them to remain there — had endured all
species of inconvenience and injury from them, and could bear
it no longer. He warned them that unless they now came for-
ward and permitted adequate protection to the south from being
overrun by these swarms of free negroes from every state in the
Union, that the people of the south would take the matter into
their own hands, and commence a war of extermination. Were
they to sit quietly and witness this degraded population, these
idle, thieving negroes, who were driven from other states, or set

"This account of Whitney's speech is taken from the Sangamo Journal,
September 3.

MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 861

free on condition of their coming here, overrun the whole south,
and raise no voice to call for protection, for fear of shocking the
humane feelings of such men as the gentleman from Boone and a
few others? The south had already given up much, by allowing
this matter to be submitted separately, and he demanded its
passage in justice to her people.

Mr. PRATT said, that this subject needed no discussion;
and, as much time would be spent in crimination and recrimin-
ation, and all to no good, he moved the previous question. On
which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and the Convention
refused to second the demand for the previous question — yeas 59,
nays 76.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery said, the people at the south —
the constituents of the southern delegates upon this floor — are
all in favor of an unqualified prohibition of negro immigration;
they do not, as their delegates well know, want any such provision
to be submitted to them separately, they want it to be embodied
in the constitution. But, sir, the southern delegates here, in a
spirit of compromise have yielded the well known desire of their
constituents, and have agreed to submit to the people the pro-
vision in a separate form, in order that if the north had the numeri-
cal strength to let them vote it down. Under these circumstances
he thought that there would have been no discussion upon the
subject, he believed with the gentleman from Jo Daviess, that not
a single vote will be changed if we discuss the subject for a month,
but the south was willing to vote silently upon the subject, and
the gentleman from the north refused to do so. They have taken,
as he considered, the wrong course and have gone into a discussion.
He would say a word or two upon the subject which had been
alluded to — slavery. These gentlemen come here and upbraid us
as the friends and advocates of slavery and the unfeeling and
tyrannical oppressors of the poor degraded negro. We are no
such thing. We are men who have come here from southern and
slaveholding states, we are men who have seen the evils of a negro
population, we came here to escape them, and we wish to prevent
the increase within this state of that class of population more
vicious and more degraded than even slaves — free negroes.

It came with ill grace from the gentlemen from the north, to

862 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

charge those at the south with being oppressors of the negro.
Where did they come from, who were their ancestors? They, sir,
are the sons of New England and of New York. They are the
descendents of those men, who, when their states adopted the
scale of years for the emancipation of the slaves within their limits,
carried off their negroes to the southern market and sold them
for cash, and returned to invest the price of human souls, directed
by law to be emancipated at a certain time, in land, in cattle and
other property. These charges come from men who have become
heirs to property purchased with the price of human blood and
immortal souls! How can they then charge us with being the
oppressors of negroes, when we only ask that we may be allowed
to keep them from our midst, to be rid of their evils and their
thieving, while they are enjoying the proceeds of negroes sold by
their ancestors, the price of human blood and degradation.

Mr. PINCKNEY opposed the amendment as unjust and
oppressive, and as calculated to excite against the constitution
the opposition of a large class of people who had some regard for
humanity and justice.

Mr. WEAD could not see, in the proposition now before them,
any of those unjust, inhuman or abhorrent features, that other
gentlemen seemed to have discovered. It could not work injury
to any person. It would not operate upon the rights, privileges
and property of those negroes residing here at the adoption of the
constitution; it had for its object only the prohibition of negroes
immigrating here for the future, and the crowds of that race
flowing in upon our state, filling up our southern counties with an
idle, worthless and degraded population, which not only were a
trouble and a nuisance to the communities near which they settled,
but also prevented a better population from occupying the lands
covered by them. That we had the right to exclude them he con-
sidered a plain question. We had the right to exclude from our
soil any race or class of persons, no matter what their color, their
creed, or their place of nativity. The first duty of every govern-
ment was the protection of its own citizens, and to do so, if
such were necessary they may exclude the immigration of any
people. The question was then one of expediency, and not one
of humanity, Christianity, or benevolence. Such was but the

MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 863

miserable, false and absurd veil thrown over the true question by
those who, desirous of other ends, attempt to hide them by their
loud cries of sympathy and humanity for the human race. Gen-
tlemen from the south have told us of the evils and wrongs in-
flicted upon the southern part of the state, in consequence of the
crowding in upon them of this negro population, which is emphati-
cally the refuse of humanity. It was then the question, shall we
protect the white inhabitants of this state from any further evils
and wrongs from this wretched population, which other states
were driving out of their limits and forcing into our own.
Will any man refuse to give the people the privilege of voting upon
a provision that will afford them protection ? Mr. W. said that when
this subject was up before, he considered that the Legislature
had the power to impose adequate barriers to the immigration
of these negroes, but as the question now before them submitted
the question to the people, he was willing to allow them to vote
upon it.

Mr. SINGLETON advocated his amendment and pointed out
its more practicable and efficient points as compared with the
amendment of Mr. Bond.

Mr. WILLIAMS opposed both propositions.

Mr. PALMER of Macoupin defended his position upon the
question. He would vote for the proposition. While up, he
administered a rebuke to those members on the floor who had
represented him at home as having voted with the abolitionists.

Mr. BLAIR moved the previous question; which was ordered.

Mr. LOGAN moved the Convention adjourn. Lost.

The question was then taken by yeas and nays on the substi-
tute offered by Mr. Singleton, and it was rejected — yeas 14,
nays 127.

The question recurred on the amendment of Mr. Bond, was
taken by yeas and nays, and decided in the affirmative — yeas 97,
nays 56.

And the section was then adopted.

And the Convention then adjourned till 3 p. m.

864 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

AFTERNOON

Sec. 6. That the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate.

Mr. SWAN moved to amend the section by adding thereto:

"The Legislature shall pass no law, nor shall any law be in
force after the adoption of this constitution, that shall prohibit the
citizens of this state from feeding the hungry, or clothing the naked,
or restrain them from exercising the common principles of philan-
thropy or dictates of humanity. Nor shall any law remain in
force that recognizes the principle that a person of color is pre-
sumed to be a slave until he has proved himself to be free; or that
prescribes whipping as a punishment for offences. But the
Legislature shall provide by law for the support of schools for the
education of colored children, and shall adopt such other measures
as they may deem expedient for the benefit and improvement of
colored persons in this state."

Mr. McC ALLEN moved to lay the amendment on the table.

Mr. WHITNEY asked the yeas and nays; which were ordered
and resulted — yeas 97, nays 28.

Mr. CHURCH offered the following, as an amendment to the
section:

"The Legislature shall pass no law preventing any citizen of
any one of the United States, from immigrating to or settling
within this state."

Mr. AKIN moved to lay the amendment on the table.

On which motion the yeas and nays were ordered and re-
sulted— yeas 84, nays 49.

Mr. WHITNEY offered as a substitute for the section:

"Trial by jury shall be allowed in all suits at law, but a jury
trial may be waived by the parties in all civil cases in the manner
prescribed by law." Rejected — yeas 30, nays not counted.

The section was then adopted.

Section seven was adopted, as follows:

Sec. 7. That the people shall be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and possessions, from unreasonable searches and seizures;
and that general warrants, whereby an officer may be commanded
to search suspected places without evidence of the fact committed,
or to seize any person or persons not named, whose offences are

MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 865

not particularly described and supported by evidence, are dan-
gerous to liberty, and ought not to be granted.

Sec. 8. That no freeman shall be imprisoned or disseized of
his freehold, liberties or privileges, or outlawed or exiled, or in any
manner deprived of his life, liberty, or property, but by the judg-
ment of his peers or the law of the land.

Mr. CROSS of Winnebago moved to strike out "freeman,"
in the first line, and insert "person;" and demanded the yeas and
nays, which were ordered. The motion was rejected — yeas 26,
nays 100.

The section was then adopted.

Sec. 9. That in all criminal prosecutions, the accused hath
a right to be heard by himself and counsel; to demand the
nature and cause of the accusation against him; to meet the
witnesses face to face; to have compulsory process to compel
the attendance of witnesses in his favor; and in prosecutions
by indictment or information, a speedy public trial by an im-
partial jury of the county, or districts, wherein the offence shall have
been committed, which county or district shall have been pre-
viously ascertained by law; and that he shall not be compelled
to give evidence against himself.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall offered, as an additional section,
a proposition in relation to the pay of members of the Legis-
lature, &c.

Mr. DALE moved to lay it on the table.

Mr. PALMER withdrew his motion.

Mr. SIM offered an amendment; which was adopted.

Mr. KiTCHELL and Mr. Hawley offered amendments; which
were rejected.

The section was then adopted.

Sec. 10. That no person shall, for any indictable offence,
be proceeded against criminally by information, except in cases
arising in the land or naval forces, or the militia when in actual
service, in time of war or public danger, by leave of the courts,
for oppression or misdemeanor in office.

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to substitute therefor, the follow-
ing:

"No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offence

866 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

unless on the presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except
in cases of impeachment, or in cases cognizable by justices of the
peace, or arising in the army or navy, or in the militia, when
in actual service in time of war or public danger.

And the question was taken thereon — yeas 65, nays 39. No
quorum voting.

Mr. THORNTON moved to strike out the words: "or in
cases cognizable by justices of the peace, or."

Mr. LOCKWOOD added to his amendment:— "Proo«We^,
that justices of the peace shall try no person, except as a court
of inquiry, for any offence punishable with imprisonment or by
death, or by fine above $100."

Mr. THORNTON then withdrew his motion to amend.

And the substitute was adopted.

Sec. II. No person shall, for the same offence, be twice put
in jeopardy of his life or limb; nor shall any man's property be
taken or applied to public use, without the consent of his repre-
sentatives in the General Assembly, nor without just compen-
sation being made to him.

Mr. KITCHELL offered the following, as an additional
section:

"That no person ought to be detained or required to attend
as witness in any case without just compensation, nor shall any
man's particular services be demanded, or property taken or
applied to public use, without just compensation, and in accord-
ance with law."

Mr. CONSTABLE moved that it be laid on the table.
Carried.

Mr. KITCHELL moved to amend by adding: "And the
Legislature shall make provision, by law, for the payment of
witnesses in criminal cases, where they are required to attend
courts out of their own counties."

Messrs. Logan and Constable opposed the amendment.

Mr. HARVEY moved that it be laid on the table. Carried.

The section was then adopted.

Sections twelve and thirteen were adopted as follows:

Sec. 12. Every person within this state ought to find a cer-
tain remedy ,^in thejaws, for all injuries or wrongs which he

MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 867

may receive in his person, property or character; he ought to
obtain right and justice freely, and without being obliged
to purchase it, completely and without denial, promptly and with-
out delay, conformably to the laws.

Sec. 13. That all persons shall be bailable by sufficient sure-
ties, unless for capital offences where the proof is evident or the
presumption great; and the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
shall not be suspended, unless, when in cases of rebellion or inva-
sion, the public safety may require it.

Sec. 14. All penalties shall be proportioned to the nature of
the offence, the true design of all punishment being to reform,
not to exterminate mankind.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to amend the section, by making
it read thus:

"All penalties shall be proportioned to the nature of the
offence, the true design of all punishment being to reform, not
to exterminate mankind, therefore punishment by death shall
not be inflicted."

Mr. HAYES moved, as a substitute for the proposed amend-
ment, the following: "It shall be in the discretion of the jury,
in capital trials, to substitute confinement in the state's prison for
capital punishment."

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to lay both amend-
ments on the table; on which motion the yeas and nays were
ordered, and resulted — yeas 83, nays 49.

The section was then adopted.

Section fifteen was adopted, as follows:

Sec. 15. No person shall be imprisoned for debt, unless upon
refusal to deliver up his estate for the benefit of his creditors, in
such manner as shall be prescribed by law, or in cases where there
is strong presumption of fraud.

Mr. HARVEY moved to add, as a different section, the follow-
ing; which was adopted:

"There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in
this state, only as a punishment for crime, whereof the party
shall have been duly convicted."

Sec. 16. No ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the

868 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

validity of contracts shall ever be made; and no conviction shall
work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate.

Mr. WEST moved to insert after "made," "nor any law
depriving a party of any remedy for enforcing a contract which
existed when the contract was made."

Mr. WITT moved to lay the amendment on the table; which
motion was rejected.

The amendment was then rejected.

Mr. LOGAN moved to strike out "validity," and insert
"obligation." Carried.

Mr. WILLIAMS offered, as an additional section, (in a modi-
fied form) an amendment which had been frequently presented
by him before, and was rejected.

Mr. EDWARDS offered a proviso, to be added to it; which
was adopted.

Mr. HARVEY offered another proviso, which was adopted.
And without taking a vote, the Convention adjourned till to-
morrow at 8 A. M.

LXIII. TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1847

The question pending at the adjournment yesterday was on
the amended amendment of Mr. Williams.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to add to it the following:

Provided, further, That this amendment shall not apply to
fugitives from labor.

Mr. HARVEY moved to lay the whole on the table; which
motion was refused.

The question was then taken by yeas and nays on the amend-
ment of Mr. Whiteside, and it was adopted. Yeas 73, nays 58.

Mr. HARVEY offered an additional proviso.

Mr. TURNBULL moved to lay it on the table. Yeas 58,
nays 58.

And Mr. H.'s amendment was adopted.

Mr. KNAPP of Scott offered an additional proviso.

Mr. WILLIAMS inquired if he could not withdraw his amend-
ment; and was answered he could not, the same having been
amended.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved to lay the subject on the table; and
the whole was laid on the table.

Mr. BROWN offered the following, as an additional section:

"If any person shall hereafter challenge another to fight a
duel, with any deadly weapon or in any manner whatever, the
probable issue of which might result in the death of either of the par-
ties; or if any person shall accept or shall be the bearer of a challenge,
or an acceptance of a challenge, whether the same be verbal or
written, knowing the same to be such; or if any person shall be
present at the fighting of any duel as aforesaid as the second or
aid of either party, every person so offending shall thereafter be
rendered incapable of holding or being elected to any office of
honor, profit or trust, either civil or military, under the govern-
ment of this state."

Mr. GRIMSHAW offered, as a substitute therefor, the follow-
ing:

869

870 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sec. 29. Any person who shall, after the adoption of this
constitution, fight a duel, or send or accept a challenge for that
purpose, or be aider or abettor in fighting a duel, shall be deprived
of the right of holding any office of honor or profit in this state;
and shall be punished otherwise in such manner as is, or may be,
prescribed by law.

Mr. WHITESIDE moved to lay them both on the table.
And demanded the yeas and nays thereon, which were taken, and
resulted — yeas 7, nays 126.

The substitute was then adopted, and the section was adopted.

Sec. 17. That no person shall be liable to be transported out
of this state for any offence committed within the same.

Mr. WHITNEY offered, as an additional section, the follow-
ing, which was ruled to be out of order:

Resolved, That the substitute for section six, article eight,
offered yesterday by Mr. Whitney, be, and the same is hereby
expunged from the journals of this Convention, and that the
secretary write across the face of said substitute, the word "ex-
punged;" and that the public printer print the word "expunged"
on the face thereof.

Mr. BROCKMAN moved to add to the section, the follow-
ing:

Provided, That the word freeman, as employed in this consti-
tution, shall not extend to any negro or mulatto, nor shall the
Legislature, ever hereafter, extend the right of suffrage to negroes
or mulattoes of African blood.

Mr. ADAMS moved to lay it on the table.

Mr. SINGLETON demanded the yeas and nays on the motion,
and they were ordered, and resulted — yeas 60, nays 51.

The section was then adopted.

Mr. WITT moved to reconsider the vote taken yesterday,
rejecting the proposition of Mr. Whitney, to amend the sixth
section, (in relation to jury trials); and the vote was reconsidered.

Mr. WHITNEY modified his amendment to read as follows,
and to be added to the sixth section as it stood:

"And shall extend to all cases at law, without regard to the
amount in controversy.' '

And the amendment was adopted — yeas 64, nays 50.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1S47 871

Section eighteen was then adopted, as follows:

Sec. 18. That a frequent recurrence to the fundamental prin-
ciples of civil government is absolutely necessary to preserve the
blessings of liberty.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey offered, as an additional section, the
following, and it was adopted:

"The military shall be in strict subordination to the civil
power."

Sec. 19. That the people have a right to assemble together,
in a peaceable manner, to consult for their common good, to in-
struct their representatives, and to apply to the General Assembly
for redress of grievances.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery offered, as an additional section,
the following, to follow section nineteen:

"The Legislature shall pass laws, with adequate penalties,
preventing the intermarriage of whites with blacks; and no colored
person shall ever, under any pretext, hold any office of honor or
profit in this state.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, he did not think we had
any right by the constitution to interfere with the particular
tastes of people; if whites felt disposed to marry blacks it was a
mere matter of taste, and we ought not to interfere with it.

Mr. DEITZ moved to lay it on the table. Rejected — yeas 55,
nays 63.

Mr. WITT moved the previous question; ordered.

The question was then taken by yeas and nays on the adoption
of the section, and was decided in the affirmative— yeas 79, nays

Section 19 was then adopted.

Sec. 20. The mode of levying a tax shall be by valuation, so
that every person shall pay a tax in proportion to the value of the
property he or she has in his or her possession.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL offered as an additional section to follow
section twenty, the following:

"The people at all times have a right to alter, reform or abolish
their form of government, whenever the public good may require
it."

Mr. HURLBUT moved to lay it on the table. On which

872 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

motion the yeas and nays were ordered and taken, and resulted—
yeas 77, nays 47.

Mr. TURNBULL offered an amendment to section 20, which

Mr. Z. CASEY moved to lay, together with the section, on the
table; and the motion was carried.

Section 21 was laid on the table.

Mr. KNAPP offered the following as an additional section,
and it was adopted:

' 'No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house
without the consent of the owner; nor in time of war except in
manner prescribed by law.' '

Mr. SERVANT offered the following as an additional section,
which was adopted — yeas 72, nays 44.

"That from and after the adoption of the constitution, every
person who shall be elected or appointed to any office of profit,
trust, or emolument, civil or military, legislative, executive, or
judicial, under the government of this state, shall, before he
enters upon the duties of his office, in addition to the oath pre-
scribed in this constitution, take the following oath: "I ,

do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I have not fought a duel, nor
sent or accepted a challenge, the probable issue of which might
have been the death of the challenger or challenged, nor been a
second to either party, nor in any manner aided or assisted in
such duel, nor been knowingly the bearer of such challenge or
acceptance, since the adoption of the constitution; and that I will
not be so engaged or concerned, directly or indirectly, in or about
any such duel duri;ig my continuance in office, so help me God.' '

Sec. 22. The printing presses shall be free to every person
who undertakes to examine the proceedings of the General Assem-
bly or of any branch of government; and no law shall ever be made
to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts
and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man; and every
citizen may freely speak, write, and print on any subject, being
responsible for the abuse of that liberty.

Mr. SHUMWAY offered as an additional section:

' 'No branch or branches of any United States bank shall be
located in this state."

TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1847 873

Mr. ECCLES moved a call of the Convention; which was
ordered and made.

Mr. DEITZ moved to amend by adding — ' 'unless first having
obtained the consent of the Legislature.' '

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to lay the whole sub-
ject on the table. Carried — yeas 74, nays 63.

Section twenty-three adopted.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved a reconsideration of the vote adopting
the section prohibiting intermarriage of whites with negroes.

Pending which the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. WILLIAMS withdrew his motion to reconsider pending
when the Convention adjourned.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon moved the bill of rights, as
amended, be referred to the committee on Revision, with the
following preamble and resolution in the shape of instructions to
that committee:

Whereas, so much of section nineteen of the bill of rights as
provides for the restriction upbn blacks, in connection with certain
civil rights, privileges and immunities, is an implied admission of
their possession of such rights, as citizens of this state and the
United States, in the absence of such constitutional restrictions;
and, whereas, the directions therein given to the Legislature pre-
supposes that any portion of the people of this state would be in
favor of conferring such rights and privileges (as is therein denied)
to colored people; and whereas, the Legislature would have no
power to allow to persons of color to hold office and without any
constitutional prohibition have already passed laws with severe
penalties, not only making intermarriage and marriage contracts
between them and the whites a criminal offence, but null and void,
therefore.

Resolved, That said article be committed to the committee on
Revision with instructions to omit so much of said section as refers
to persons of color.

Messrs. Edwards of Sangamon, Campbell of Jo Daviess and
Logan advocated the instructions; Messrs. Lockwood and Palmer
of Macoupin opposed them.

874 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. WITT moved the previous question; which was ordered.

And the instructions were adopted — yeas 71, nays 63.

Mr. ARCHER moved to take up the report of the committee
districting the state into senatorial and representative districts.

Mr. CALDWELL said, there was other business for the com-
mittee to act upon, and he hoped this report would be passed
over and the members of the 3d judicial district might have time
to re-apportion that district.

Mr. ARCHER withdrew his motion.

Mr. CONSTABLE renewed the motion.

Mr. ECCLES opposed the motion on the same grounds urged
by Mr. Caldwell.

Mr. HARDING moved the previous question, which was
ordered, and the report wa,s taken up — yeas 68, nays 52.

Mr. WITT moved to refer the report to a select committee of
one from each judicial circuit.

A long debate ensued upon what disposition should be made
of the report, in which many gentlemen expressed their disappro-
bation of the report.

The question was taken, and the reference was refused.

Mr. CRAIN moved to refer to a select committee of 9, that
portion of the report referring to the 2d and 3d judicial circuits.

Mr. HOGUE moved to add the 4th.

Mr. ARCHER moved to add the 5th.

Mr. AKIN moved to lay the reference on the table; on which
motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted — yeas 82,
nays 49.

Mr. McCALLEN moved as a substitute for the report the
following:

"Until there shall be a new apportionment of senators and
representatives, the state shall be divided into senatorial and rep-
resentative districts; and senators and representatives shall be
apportioned among the several counties of the state in accordance
with the provisions of an act of the General Assembly entitled
' 'An act to apportion the representation in the several counties in
this state," approved February 25, 1847.

Mr. WITT moved to amend the 22d and 23d districts, by
making them form one district with two representatives.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1847 875

Mr. AKIN moved the previous question; which was ordered —
yeas 84, nays 57.

The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, on the amend-
ment of Mr. Witt, and it was rejected — yeas 65, nays 68.

The question was then taken on the substitute of Mr. Mc-
Callen, by yeas and nays, and it was rejected — yeas 46, nays 92.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL moved to adjourn. Lost.

The question was then taken on the adoption of the report,
and it was adopted as follows — yeas 99, nays 36.

Section i. Until there shall be a new apportionment of sen-
ators and representatives, the state shall be divided into senatorial
and representative districts, and the senators and representatives
shall be apportioned among the several districts as follows, viz:

SENATORIAL DISTRICTS

I. The counties of Alexander, Union, Pulaski, Johnson,
Massac, Pope and Hardin.

1. The counties of Gallatin, Saline, Williamson, Franklin and
White.

3. The counties of Jefferson, Marion, Wayne and Hamilton.

4. The counties of Washington, Perry, Randolph and Jack-
son.

5. The counties of St. Clair and Monroe.

6. The counties of Madison and Clinton.

7. The counties of Christian, Shelby, Montgomery, Bond and
Fayette.

8. The counties of Effingham, Jasper, Clay, Richland, Law-
rence, Edwards and Wabash.

9. The counties of Edgar, Clark and Crawford.

10. The counties of Vermilion, Champaign, Piatt, Moultrie,
Coles and Cumberland.

11. The counties of Tazewell, McLean, Logan, DeWitt and
Macon.

12. The counties of Sangamon, Menard and Mason.

13. The counties of Macoupin, Jersey, Greene and Calhoun.

14. The counties of Morgan, Scott and Cass.

15. The counties of Adams and Pike.

876 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

1 6. The counties of McDonough, Schuyler, Brown and High-
land.

17. The counties of Hancock and Henderson.

18. The counties of Fulton and Peoria.

19. The counties of Rock Island, Henry, Mercer, Warren,
Knox and Stark.

20. The counties of LaSalle, Bureau, Putnam, Marshall,
Woodford, Livingston and Grundy.

21. The counties of DuPage, Kendall, Will and Iroquois.

22. The counties of Ogle, Lee, DeKalb and Kane.

23. The counties of Jo Daviess, Stephenson, Carroll and
Whiteside.

24. The counties of McHenry, Boone and Winnebago.

25. The counties of Cook and Lake.

REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICTS

1. The counties of Union, Alexander and Pulaski.

2. The counties of Massac, Pope, and Hardin.

3. The counties of Gallatin and Saline.

4. The counties of Johnson and Williamson.

5. The counties of Jackson and Franklin.

6. The counties of Marion, Jefferson, Wayne and Hamilton,
with three representatives; Provided, that no county in said dis-
trict shall have more than one of said representatives, and the
county from which a senator shall be selected shall not be entitled
to a representative residing in said county.

7. The county of White.

8. The counties of Wabash and Edwards.

9. The counties of Lawrence and Richland.

10. The counties of Crawford and Jasper.

11. The county of Coles.

12. The county of Clark.

13. The counties of Cumberland, Effingham and Clay.

14. The county of Fayette.

15. The counties of Montgomery, Bond and Clinton, with
two representatives.

16. The counties of Washington and Perry.

17. The county of Randolph.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1847 877

18. The county of Monroe.

19. The county of St. Clair, with two representatives.

20. The county of Madison, with two representatives.

21. The county of Macoupin.

22. The county of Jersey.

23. The county of Green,'e.

24. The county of Scott.

25. The county of Morgan, with two representatives.

26. The counties of Cass and Menard.

27. The county of Sangamon, with two representatives.

28. The counties of Mason and Logan.

29. The county of Tazewell.

30. The counties of McLean and DeWitt.

31. The county of Vermilion.

32. The county of Edgar.

22. The counties of Champaign, Piatt, Moultrie and Macon.

34. The counties of Shelby and Christian.

2^. The counties of Pike and Calhoun, with two representa-
tives.

36. The counties of Adams, Highland and Brown, with three
representatives.

37. The county of Schuyler.

38. The county of Hancock, with two representatives.

39. The county of McDonough.

40. The county of Fulton, with two representatives.

41. The county of Peoria.

42. The county of Knox.

43. The counties of Mercer, Warren and Henderson, with two
representatives.

44. The counties of Rock Island, Henry and Stark.

45. The counties of Whiteside and Lee.

46. The counties of Carroll and Ogle.

47. The counties of Jo Daviess and Stephenson.

48. The county of Winnebago.

49. The counties of Putnam, Marshall and Woodford.

50. The counties of LaSalle, Grundy, Livingston and Bureau,
with two representatives.

878 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

51. The counties of DuPage, Kendall, Will and Iroquois,
with three representatives.

52. The counties of Kane and DeKalb, with two representa-
tives.

53. The counties of Boone and McHenry, with two represent-
atives.

54. The county of Lake.

55. The county of Cook, with two representatives.

Sec. 2. Until the General Assembly shall otherwise provide,
the clerks of the county commissioners' courts in each of the
aforesaid senatorial districts, and in such of the said representa-
tive districts as may be composed of more than one county, shall
meet at the county seat of the oldest county in said district, within
thirty days next after any election for senator or representative
therein, for the purpose of comparing and canvassing the votes
given at such election, and the said clerks shall in all other respects
conform to the laws, on the subject, in force at the time of the
adoption of this constitution.

Mr. AKIN moved to refer the report, together with that on
the Legislative Department, to the committee on Revision.
Carried.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison offered a resolution granting the
use of the hall, on Wednesday evening, to Prof. McGuffey, of
Virginia; which was carried.

The Convention then adjourned.

LXIV. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Barger.

Mr. J. M. PALMER presented the following resolution:

Ordered, by the Convention, that the committee on Revision,
to whom, on yesterday, the report of the select committee to
divide the state into senatorial and representative districts was
referred, be instructed to so modify said report, that the same shall
stand as follows:

"The counties of Jersey and Greene shall constitute the
twenty-second representative district, and shall be entitled to
two representatives, and that they arrange the succeeding part of
said report so as to correspond thereto."

Mr. WOODSON said, that he desired to trouble the Conven-
tion with a few remarks on this subject. When the motion was
submitted yesterday by his colleague (Mr. Witt) to amend this
report, it was immediately followed by a motion for the previous
question, and it being sustained by the house, cut off all opportu-
nity for explanation. There being no other mode of bringing the
question fairly before the Convention, but in the form now pro-
posed, he embraced the occasion respectfully to call the attention
of the Convention to the injustice done the county of Greene by
that apportionment reported by the committee. If he were to
neglect to present the matter in its true light here, he should be
recreant to the trust reposed in him by his constituents. A simple
statement of facts will satisfy this Convention that we are asking
for nothing more than we are justly entitled to. By reference to
the map and the census, it will be perceived that Greene contains
a population of 11,522, whilst Jersey contains only 5,637, being
less than one-half of the reported population of Greene by 752[?].
But, although we are governed by the population of Greene, as
reported to the Convention by the returns of the census of 1845,
yet he would unhesitatingly assert, that even that is not the true
population of the county by several thousand. Great injustice has
been done that county by theimperfectmannerof taking the census,
879

88o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

not only in denying her her true strength in the Legislature,
but in other respects. In view of those facts, what justice is there
in giving to Greene but one representative, whilst a county adjoin-
ing her, with less than one-half her population, has also one?
Make the proposed change and both counties will be equally
represented; the entire population will be represented and no in-
justice will be done to either. He wished to do no injustice to
Jersey. Towards her he had the kindest feelings. He was under
great and lasting obligations for kindness to him personally, and
for the confidence she has, on former occasions, reposed in him;
but he had duties to discharge to his constituents paramount to
all other considerations. He would, if he could, accommodate
that county, but he could not do so at the expense of the county he
represented, to the people of whom he was under so many obliga-
tions. He hoped the motion would prevail. It was unnecessary
for him to say more, as he desired to consume no time.

Mr. KNAPP of Jersey opposed the instructions. He thought
that Jersey and other small counties, to whom was given the excess
of larger and adjoining counties, should be entitled to a separate
representative. It was the only safety they had.

Mr. WILLIAMS offered the following as an amendment to the
instructions:

"And also that they so change the thirty-sixth section as to
give Adams, including Highland, two representatives, and Brown
one, and that they form two separate districts."

Mr. WILLIAMS urged the adoption of the amendment in
justice to the county that he represented. In the course of his
remarks he said, that the committee had been induced to form the
district as it now stood, in consequence of a statement made to
it by the gentleman from Knox, (Mr. Harvey) who stated to the
committee that six of the seven members of the Convention from
the three counties were in favor of the arrangement, and preferred
it to any other. That the two members from Brown, and his four
colleagues, all were in favor of it, and preferred it to a district
which gave Adams two and Brown one. Since then, he had been
better informed and knew that the members from Brown desired
no such thing, they both desired, if possible, that Brown
should have a representative.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1847 881

Mr. KINNEY of Bureau moved to amend the amendment by-
adding to it the following:

"That said committee arrange the report, that the counties of
Marshall, Woodford, Livingston, and Grundy shall constitute the
forty-ninth representative district, and be entitled to one represent-
ative; the county of LaSalle shall be the fiftieth district and have
one representative; the counties of Bureau and Putnam shall form
a separate district.' '

Mr. SINGLETON, in relation to the matter of arranging the
district composed of Adams, Highland and Brown counties, made
an explanation, the substance of which was, that he and his col-
league were both very anxious to have a representative from
Brown; that he used all his endeavors to get some whig on the
committee to attend to the interests of the county. Not one of
that party could be induced to interfere; they even declined voting
on the question. The gentleman from Schuyler (Mr. Minshall)
refused to have anything to do with it. After repeated and
urgent requests, they succeeded in obtaining the gentleman from
Knox to attend to the interests of the county and to endeavor, if
possible, to have a separate district formed of the county of Brown
and the eastern range of the townships of Highland county, for
Brown alone had not a sufficient population to be entitled to a
member. The committee refused to form a district of that kind;
refused to divide a county. There was then no alternative but
to be attached to Highland and Adams as one district. To this
we had to submit, and to it we consented. There was never at
any time a proposition before the committee to form a district of
Adams and Highland, and one of Brown. Such a thing was sug-
gested by the gentleman from Morgan, who was considered as the
representative of the gentleman from Adams, but he had no
authority for so doing and it could not be passed. The represent-
atives from Brown never refused to accept a member from Brown,
and had done every thing they could to obtain such. The Con-
vention had refused to give Brown and part of Highland a member.
They were satisfied that the gentleman from Knox had acted
fairly and had done all he could to forward their views, and that,
too, when all others had refused to have anything to do with the
matter.

882 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. HARVEY made a statement of his agency in the matter.
He had engaged in the subject only after repeated and urgent
solicitations on the part of the gentlemen from Brown, who were
anxious to have a district formed of their county and a portion of
Highland. The members from Adams county and the member
from Highland opposed the division of that county. Brown had
not a population sufficient to be entitled to one representative. All
others on the committee refused to interfere; the gentleman from
Schuyler who was from that circuit refused to have anything to do
with the subject. The only mode then that was left was to unite
the three counties, and let Brown have her chance to secure one of
these at the election. To form this district he had the consent,
as he understood and believed at the time, of six-sevenths of the
delegation — of them all except the gentleman from Adams (Mr.
Williams). Whom was he to follow ? To follow one member, or to
follow six. He cared nothing about the district — it was one hun-
dred miles from his county. He had acted only as he would con-
sider himself bound to do under all circumstances — follow the
desire of six-sevenths of those whom he represented. He expected
this attack upon him this morning. He had been threatened by
the gentleman from Adams, when this district was formed that
he would receive a scorching for his agency in the matter. He
had received the scorching, and cared but little, at any time, for
a scorching for following the request of six men in preference to
that of one. He would refer the Convention, as a proof that such
was the fact, to a letter in the Quincy Whig, over the signature of
the gentleman, wherein he himself stated that six out of the seven
members agreed to this district. The two gentlemen from Brown,
and the three colleagues of the gentleman from Adams, consented
to this district. One of them, Mr. Powers, expressed himself as
decidedly opposed to severing Highland from Adams, and in favor
of the district. The gentleman from Highland (Mr. Simpson)
cared but little either way, he was only anxious for his own county
and desirous to retain the territory.

Mr. PALMER of Marshall moved to lay all the amendments
on the table; which motion was lost — yeas 54, nays 88.

Mr. WILLIAMS replied to Mr. Harvey, and urged that he
did oppose the districting of the counties so as that Brown might

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1847 883

have one representative, and Adams two, and that he had stated
that six of the members had declared themselves in favor of such
an arrangement. He had been informed by the gentleman from
Brown, and by his colleagues, Messrs. Simpson and Nichols, that
such was untrue! And he would leave the question of veracity
to be settled between them.

Mr. HARVEY asked the gentleman to give way and enable
those members to make a statement of what were the facts.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, he hoped the gentleman would not
interrupt him. He was not going to settle the question of veracity
between the gentlemen. As to the letter that was in the Quincy
Whig, he would state that he wrote that letter and based the
assertion therein contained upon the assertion of the member from
Knox, made before the committee, which since then he had learned
to be untrue, and therefore had written another letter correcting
the erroneous statement. He had stated to the member from
Knox in committee, that a day would come when this subject could
be investigated, and when members might assert their rights.
This had been construed into a threat. Mr. W. followed the
matter for some time longer.

Mr. BROCKMAN said, he rose for the purpose of correcting
a false statement, which had been made in regard to himself as
connected with this subject. He had, at all times during the
sessions of the committee, attempted to get a representative for
Brown. He would, in justice to the gentleman from Knox, say
that he had strongly solicited him to obtain a representative from
the county of Brown and the east tier of townships of the county
of Highland, which passed before the committee, and was at a
subsequent session changed, at which time he was not present.

If it had been stated before that committee, that he had ex-
pressed a desire not to vote separately for a representative from
Brown, those statements had been made without any authority
from him. He said it was his desire that if Brown could not get a
representative, then he was desirous to vote with Adams and High-
land as one representative district for the election of three repre-
sentatives by general ticket. It is the wish of the citizens of Brown
to get one representative.

Mr. SIMPSON said, that he had never authorized anyone to

884 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

say that he was opposed to giving Brown a representative. He
had been opposed to dividing Highland county and wished her to
vote with Adams. Brown county then, not having enough popu-
lation to be entitled to a member, he was anxious that she should
be joined to Adams and Highland as at present, and had said so
to every one. He was in favor of the district.

Mr. Thomas and Mr. Singleton further explained.

Mr. TURNBULL moved the previous question; which was
ordered.

Mr. WILLIAMS then withdrew his amendment, and with it
fell the amendment of Mr. Kinney.

The question being taken, by yeas and nays, on the instruc-
tions in relation to Greene and Jersey counties, it was carried —
yeas 91, nays 45.

Mr. KINNEY renewed his proposition to instruct the com-
mittee.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to lay it on the table. Carried—
yeas 96, nays 35.

Mr. BROCKMAN renewed the instructions offered by Mr.
Williams in relation to Adams, Highland and Brown counties.

Mr. LAUGHLIN made some remarks, understood to be appro-
batory of the district as it stood, and moved to lay the instruc-
tions on the table. And the motion was carried — yeas 72, nays 55.

Mr. ECCLES moved to take up the report of the committee
on Miscellaneous Subjects, exempting a homestead of 80 acres in
land, not exceeding $500 in value, and of a town lot, to the head
of each family, not exceeding in value $500, from execution or
forced sale for debts contracted after the adoption of the constitu-
tion; and securing to married women all real estate owned by them
at the time of their marriage, against all debts contracted by her
husband &c. And the same was taken up and read.

Mr. SHIELDS moved to lay the whole report on the table.

Mr. GRAIN asked for the yeas and nays and they were ordered,
taken, and resulted — yeas 70, nays 56.

Mr. MARKLEY moved to take up the report of the committee
on Finance. Carried. It was read as follows:

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1847

The General Assembly shall provide for, and there shall be
annually levied, a tax of not less than three mills on every dollar's
worth of personal and real property within this state, to be ascer-
tained by valuation; the proceeds of which shall be applied to the
payment of the indebtedness of the state; Provided, said tax shall
be levied no longer than is necessary to discharge the principal
and interest due and to become due on the present state debt.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison moved to strike out the section
and insert,

Section i. There shall be annually assessed and collected, in
the same manner as other state revenue may be assessed and
collected, a tax of two mills upon each one dollar's worth of tax-
able property, in addition to all other taxes, to be applied as
follows, to-wit: The fund so created shall be kept separate,
and shall annually, on the first day of January, be apportioned
and paid over pro rata upon all such state indebtedness, other than
the canal and school indebtedness, as may, for that purpose, be
presented by the holders of the same, to be entered as credits
upon, and, to that extent, in extinguishment of the principal of
said indebtedness.

Sec. 2. Hereafter any tax payer may have an estimate
made at any time, of his proportion of the state indebtedness
above provided for, by taking, as data, the whole of said indebted-
ness, principal and interest, due at the time of making the estimate —
the then last assessment of the taxable property of such tax payer,
and the aggregate of the then last assessment for the whole state,
and may pay into the treasury the amount of such estimate, either
in money or in such state indebtedness, and, upon so paying,
shall be forever discharged from any and all further assessments
on account of such state indebtedness, in respect of so much per-
sonal property as he then has, and of all such real estate as may be
included in the estimated assessment, and such real estate shall
be forever discharged from any and all further assessments, on
such account, into whose hand soever it may pass.

Sec. 3. Any state indebtedness coming into the treasury, by
virtue of the above section, shall be simply cancelled and destroyed.

886 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

and any money so coming in shall be added to and applied as
part of the aforesaid mill fund.

Sec. 4. This article shall be submitted to a vote of the people,
and if voted for by a majority of all voting on the question, shall
become a part of this constitution, and shall remain in force until
the whole of the indebtedness therein provided for shall be paid,
and longer; and interest shall be counted only upon the original
principal of said indebtedness, and the extinguished portions of
said principal shall cease to draw interest, at and from the respec-
tive times of their extinguishment. And it shall be the duty of
the General Assembly to make all necessary provisions for carry-
ing this article into effect in good faith.

He said, that he regretted the apathy, so evident in the Con-
vention, upon this subject of the state debt, one in which they
should feel so much interest, and which was of so vital importance
to the interests, feelings and character of the people of the state.
He thought that he could demonstrate to the satisfaction of any
one that there was a plan whereby, with the sanction and approval
of the people, the whole internal improvement debt may be paid,
interest and principal. This plan was based on the following
calculation:

The conclusion to which I have come is that the adoption of
this section, will, within twenty-five years from the beginning of
1848, and without much increasing our aggregate burden of taxa-
tion beyond what it now is, totally extinguish that part of our
debt, principal and interest. I reach this conclusion as follows:
The principal of that part of the debt is |6, 245, 280. I assume
that a two mill tax will in 1 848 produce $200,000, because the two
mill tax now collected, rose from $163,437.45 i" ^845 to
$175,135.92 in 1846 — a ratio of increase which will bring it up
to the assumption. I next assume that this fund will, by the in-
crease of taxable property in the state, have an average annual
increase of seven per cent upon the original $200,000 through the
twenty-five years. I make this assumption, because the popu-
lation of Illinois rose from 478,429 in 1840 to 662,150 in 1845 — a
period of extreme discouragement to settlement in the state, being
an increase of 7 25-100 per cent, per annum; because the
increase of the two mill fund, between 1845 and 1846, is 7 15-100

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 887

per cent.; and, with reference to the continuance of increase,
because Ohio, the only much older state which is otherwise very
similar to ours, rose in population from 581,432, in 1820, to 1,515-
895, in 1840, an average of 8 34-100 per cent, per annum.
Upon these two assumptions, first, of ?2oo,ooo from the fund in
1848, and second, an increase of 7 per cent, per annum, it is the
best calculation to discover that we have, at the end of nineteen
years $6,194,000, which leaves of the principal only $51,380.
There is, however, already accrued of interest on this part of our
debt $2,248,372, which will be swelled to about $3,000,000 before
this provision can operate. There will accrue upon it during the
nineteen years $3,559,916, making together $6,559,916, which will
be lessened by the application of three-fifths of the mill and a
half fund now in operation during the nineteen years, $2,784,300,
reducing it to $3,775,616. To this add the $51,380 of the principal,
making $3,826,996 the amount, mostly without interest, which we
have still to overcome at the end of the nineteen years. To do
this, we now have the joint force of the two mill and the
three-fifths of the mill and a half funds, which, in six years more, in
all twenty-five years, produces $4,358,700 covering all, and leaving
a surplus of about a half million. This shows how the debt can
be paid in twenty-five years. But I have said it can be done with-
out much increasing our aggregate of taxation. I say this simply
because we shall, by the new constitution, lessen the aggregate of
state and county expenditures to an amount almost, if not quite,
equal to the two mill tax.

Mr. CONSTABLE said, that as the subject was most impor-
tant, he moved the plan of Mr. Edwards be laid on the table and
printed and made the special order for to-morrow at 3 p. m.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to take up the report dividing the
state into three grand divisions for judicial purposes; which
motion was carried.

The report was read:

Sec. I. The first grand division, for the election of judges of
the supreme court shall consist of the counties of Alexander, Pul-
aski, Massac, Pope, Hardin, Gallatin, Saline, Williamson, Johnson,
Union, Jackson, Randolph, Perry, Franklin, Hamilton, White,
Wabash, Edwards, Wayne, Jefferson, Washington, Monroe, St.

888 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Clair, Clinton, Marion, Clay, Richland, Lawrence, Crawford,
Jasper, Effingham, Fayette, Bond, Madison, Jersey and Calhoun.

The second grand division shall consist of the counties of Edgar,
Coles, Moultrie, Shelby, Montgomery, Macoupin, Greene, Pike,
Adams, Highland, Hancock, McDonough, Schuyler, Brown, Ful-
ton, Mason, Cass, Morgan, Scott, Sangamon, Christian, Macon,
Piatt, Champaign, Vermilion, DeWitt, Logan, Menard, Cumber-
land and Clark.

The third grand division shall consist of the counties of Hen-
derson, Warren, Knox, Peoria, Tazewell, Woodford, McLean,
Livingston, Iroquois, Will, Grundy, Kendall, LaSalle, Putnam,
Marshall, Stark, Bureau, Henry, Mercer, Rock Island, Whiteside,
Lee, Carroll, Jo Daviess, Stephenson, Winnebago, Ogle, DeKalb,
Boone, Kane, McHenry, Lake, Cook and DuPage.

Sec. 2. The term of the supreme court for the first division
shall be held at Mount Vernon, in Jefferson county; for the second
division, at Springfield, in Sangamon county; for the third di-
vision, at Princeton, in Bureau county, until some other place in
either division is fixed by law.

Sec. 3. Appeals and writs of error may be taken from the
circuit court of any county to the supreme court held in the di-
vision which includes such county, or to the supreme court in the
next adjoining division.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved to strike out ' 'Prince-
ton, in Bureau county," and insert "Ottawa, in La Salle county."
Carried unanimously.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean moved to strike out "McLean and
Tazewell counties' ' from the 3d division, and add them to the 2d
division.

Mr. ARCHER opposed the motion. The population now, he
was informed, of the middle division was greater than of either of
the other two divisions. He was willing to take the report as it
now stood, but if the change was made he would vote for changing
the place of holding the court from Springfield to Jacksonville.

Mr. MARKLEY was opposed to the change. — The northern
district now had the smallest population, and if these counties
were changed and put to the middle district, the northern district
would be still smaller.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1847 889

Mr. LOGAN advocated the motion on the ground of conveni-
ence to the people of the counties of McLean and Tazewell, who
would prefer to come to Springfield, than to go to Ottawa. View-
ing the question politically, the district would still be democratic
by 1,500 majority, although he was informed that the present
judge of this circuit, who was a democrat, and who would prob-
ably be the candidate of the party, was opposed to bringing these
counties into the district because they were whig.

Messrs. Campbell of Jo Daviess, Palmer of Macoupin, Arm-
strong, Davis of McLean, Caldwell and Edwards of Sanga-
mon continued the discussion.

Without taking the question, the Convention adjourned till
3 P- M-

afternoon

Mr. COLBY asked a suspension of the rules to enable him to
offer a resolution; which, after being amended, was adopted as
follows :

Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed to procure
the translation and printing of the copies of the constitution
ordered by this Convention to be printed in the German language,
and, also, a committee for the same purpose in relation to the
publication in the Norwegian language.

Mr. DAVIS of McLean withdrew his amendment pending at
the adjournment at noon.

Mr. LOGAN moved to add to the report:

' 'The foregoing districts may, after the taking of each census
by the state, be altered if necessary to equalize the said districts
in population; but each alteration shall be made by adding to such
districts such adjacent county or counties as will make said dis-
trict nearest equal in population; Provided, no such alteration
shall affect the judge then in office."

Mr. CAMPBELL of McDonough moved to substitute there-
for: ' 'That all the counties in the first and third grand divisions be
added to the second, andelectthesupremejudgesbygeneral ticket."

Mr. ECCLES moved to lay the substitute on the table; and
the motion was carried.

Mr. DEMENT offered as a substitute for the amendment:

890 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

' 'The qualified voters of each of the three grand divisions shall
vote for the three supreme judges, one of whom shall reside in and
be taken from each of said divisions."

Mr. LOCK WOOD moved to lay the same on the table; and
the motion prevailed.

The question was taken on the adoption of Mr. Logan's
amendment, and it was carried.

The report, as amended, was referred to the committee on
revision &c.

Mr. HAYES moved to take up the report of the committee
on Law Reform; and it was read as follows:

ARTICLE —

Sec. I. It shall be the duty of the General Assembly to pro-
vide for a codification of the laws, and after the year 1870, neither
the common law, nor any English statute, not re-enacted, shall be
in force, or regarded by the courts, except to aid in the exposition
and construction of the laws of this state.

Sec. 2. All the laws shall be published for the information of
the people; and no foreign statute shall hereafter be passed or
adopted by the General Assembly unless the same be first reduced
to writing.

Sec. 3. No official writing, or executive, legislative, or judicial
proceeding shall be had, conducted, preserved, or published in any
other than the English language.

Sec. 4. In all suits in chancery the evidence shall be taken as
in suits at law.

Sec. 5. The General Assembly shall never pass any law of
primogeniture.

Mr. HAYES said, the late day of the session, the fifteen minute
rule, and the evident impatience of members to return to their
homes, all warned him that he was asking the attention of the Con-
vention under the most unfavorable auspices. When he reflected
on his deficiencies, his want of that extensive learning and pro-
found wisdom which are the rewards of long study and experience,
it was with diffidence and apprehension that he stood forth to
discuss before that able and enlightened body, a subject so diffi-
cult as that under consideration.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1847 891

I would, said Mr. H., that I could call to my aid the ready
ingenuity of the gentleman from Sangamon, the solid strength
of the gentleman from Adams, and the brilliant eloquence of the
gentleman from Jo Daviess. But I much fear that they, with
others as able, are arrayed against me on this measure.

It is with serious hesitation and reflection that I have taken
the position I occupy. I was not free from prejudice. I had
studied, with some attention the common law, remarked its
gothic strength, its breadth of outline, the elaborate finish of its
details, and like one who has lived only among the costly struc-
tures and ingenious contrivances of art, I lost sight of the grandeur
and simplicity of nature. An anxious investigation of the subject
has wrought a change in my views, and convinced me of the
necessity and propriety of an extensive reform.

The idea of codification has elsewhere excited much attention,
and drawn to its support some of the greatest men of the country,
but here it is new, and will, therefore, by many, be denounced as
dangerous. We do propose an innovation. When Martin Luther
raised the cry of reform, and endeavored to free Europe from the
religious despotism which had fettered her for ages, he advocated
an innovation. When Galileo invented the telescope, by which
the wonders of the heavens were brought near to human observa-
tion, he was imprisoned as an innovator. When Harvey declared
the circulation of the blood in the human system, the great fact
which has become the basis of the science of medicine, he was
' the advocate of innovation. When Faust and others invented
printing with types, the great art which was to preserve and dis-
seminate through the world the fruits of genius and the products
of intellect, they introduced an innovation. When Columbus,
standing on the verge of an unexplored sea, at the limit of the
known world, declared that the earth was round, and that beyond
that sea were regions as fair and as fertile as any the eye of civi-
lized man had rested on, he was an advocate of innovation. When
Thomas Jefferson and the other framers of the declaration of
independence, pronounced the great truth that all men are by
nature free and equal, and have a right to govern themselves, they
were the advocates of an innovation.

I, for one, am willing to take the responsibility of advocating

892 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

a reform in our system of laws, though I may be misunderstood,
my notions misrepresented, and my proposition denounced as a
startling innovation.

It has been said on this floor that there are prejudices against
lawyers — a disposition to exclude them from the halls of legislation.
That is true, but gentlemen have much mistaken the cause of the
feeling. It is not because the people dislike the profession. They
give them the highest place in their esteem. They know them to
be, in general, men of honor and character, intelligent and patri-
otic, the class which furnished Jefferson, Adams, Madison and
Jackson to the country in time past, and from whose ranks many
of the wisest living statesmen have been taken. They appreciate
all this, but there is a fear of lawyers in the state legislature, be-
cause they doubt whether their habits of thought, their intimacy
with a complicated and artificial system, will promote that sim-
plicity and plainness which they are anxious to see in their laws.

I trust that the lawyers in this Convention will convince them
that their fears are unfounded; and I believe that many of them
will be found advocating this reform. I take it to be the first
principle of American politics that the people have the right of
self-government, the right to know the laws under which they live.
If this be a correct principle, the importance of a codification must
be admitted by all. I do not suppose the laws which are to govern
civilized men in all the relations of society, can be embraced in
one book or two. They might occupy many volumes. The
question with me is, can they be considerably reduced. I believe
they can. Neither do I suppose that they can be made so simple
that every man will be his own lawyer in different cases. I only
inquire, can they not be made more simple, more plain of com-
prehension, more easy of access than they now are.'' I believe
they can. That the landmarks by which civil society is regulated
can be so far exposed to the public eye as to furnish right thinking,
even with a guide in the transactions of life, a knowledge of the
general rules of law which are to operate on his interests. I am
answered, that, although the principle be right, such inconven-
iences will follow its enforcement in practice as to require us to
disregard it. I have never been able to see that a thing right in
theory becomes wrong in practice. Correct principles are to an

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1847 893

individual the compass by which alone he can steer his bark in
safety over the rough and uncertain sea of life. Without them he
will be driven by the storms of passion, and drifted by the currents
of temptation, till his career is ended in shipwreck and ruin. So
with nations. If guided by no principle of national policy, un-
certainty attends their course, despotism or anarchy witnesses
their downfall. When, to the contrary, they are consistent in
their adherence to fundamental principles, their march is certain,
and onward for good or for evil.

[The PRESIDENT here announced to Mr. H. that his fifteen
minutes had expired; but he was, by the unanimous consent of the
Convention, permitted to proceed.]

Mr. HAYES proceeded : We have organized government upon
a particular view of the nature and rights of man — upon certain
axioms of self-government. When we depart from them no one
can tell how soon our greatness may have a disastrous end.

But the inconveniences which may result from a codification
of our laws have been greatly overrated. Gentlemen assume that
there are certain glorious, intangible principles of the English law
which are all important to our welfare, and cannot be touched
without danger. I will not detain the Convention by a discussion
of the evils of which we complain. I have referred to them at
some length in the report which I presented some days since, and
which has been published. I will say to gentlemen that it is not
my wish to attack the principles of the common law. Those
principles, so far as they are the rules for judicial interpretation,
are admirable. They are neither more nor less than the rules of
common sense, which are necessarily developed by the exercise of
reason.

But, sir, let me draw your attention to a distinction between
those principles and the provisions of the English law which we
have adopted by the statute of 1819. Bear in mind that we have
taken the English law, so far as applicable and of a general nature,
down to the 4th James I, in the year 1607. The wise reforms
which have taken place since then in England, we have entirely
discarded. Yet some learned lawyers have said that the common
law has almost entirely grown up from decisions made after the
accession of William and Mary in 1688 1 How much of this can

894 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

our courts legally adopt under the act of 1819? Beyond doubt
wise and good men have lived in every age, men whose hearts have
beat with a love of liberty, but I do say that the rights of men
were not fully recognized, either in political or legal systems, until
a much later day. Whatever free and liberal provisions may have
been a part of the common law in the times of the Saxon kings, it
is certain that from the time of the Norman conquest, in 1066,
down to 1607, its provisions, both as a system and in its details,
were opposed to liberty, and entirely inadequate to our wants.
They began at the wrong end. Instead of acknowledging the
sovereignty and rights of the people, and legislating for their
wants, the king was assumed to be the true source of power.

Mr. ANDERSON said, he was obliged to insist on the enforce-
ment of the rule. The Convention had never before extended
the time of any member, and the importance of an early adjourn-
ment forbade it to do so now.

Mr. HAYES remarked, that it was far from his wish to trespass
an instant longer on the time of the house, than authorized by the
rules, or by their unanimous consent. He had understood the
Convention to express a wish to hear him. The gentleman having
now objected, he would take his seat.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison moved that Mr. HAYES should
have leave to continue his remarks. Leave was given.

Mr. HAYES continued. I feel deeply sensible, Mr. President,
for the mark of favor and kindness just shown me by the Con-
vention. I will not abuse it, but will bring my remarks speedily
to a close. I was saying that the English law, as it existed in
1607, did not recognize the sovereignty of the people, or regard
their interests. This fact is apparent in nearly all its provisions.
The English had not then become as civilized as we are, nor was
the condition of society the same as it is here. Then taking this
distinction between the principles of judicial exposition and inter-
pretation, as developed in the decisions, and the provisions of the
English law, it seems to me, with all due deference, that the
great body of those provisions should be examined and the valu-
able part of them preserved in a code, with these principles, while
all the rest should be thrown aside.
'■^^ It is said that we have no men qualified for the undertaking.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1847 895

I think we have some. If we have not, it is a severe satire upon
the judges who pronounce the law from the bench — for I conceive
it as easy to do so in one way as in another.

An important end to be gained is the imposition of a restraint
upon judicial legislation. Not that it can be entirely prevented.
Perhaps it will be necessary to a certain extent under any system.
But if the entire body of laws should be placed within reach, the
powers and duties of the bench would be better understood, and
a remedy would easily be found for any evils which might spring up.

The importance of the subject, the fact that the Legislature
can at any time repeal the act of 18 19, and the further fact that
this Convention was called to reform abuses, furnish to my mind
the strongest arguments for immediate action. But, sir, without
attempting to discuss further a subject, which is exhaustless, I
must conclude by expressing my thanks for the kind and patient
attention which has been extended to me.

Mr. WOODSON said, that he felt himself called upon, before
making the motion he intended, to say a few words in explanation.
He was a member of the committee on Law Reform, and when
this report was before them the majority of the committee were
opposed to it, but, out of courtesy to the chairman, they had con-
sented that he should make the report. He and the majority of
the committee were opposed to the codification of the laws— he
believed it impracticable. If at any time such a thing should
become necessary, the Legislature had the power to provide for
it. He was opposed to any constitutional provision requiring it.
From the little knowledge he had of the common law he was satis-
fied that any codification of it was entirely impracticable. In the
New York convention a proposition was started to codify the laws,
and commissioners were appointed for that purpose —

Mr. PRATT said, it was to re-model the practice.

Mr. WOODSON. Well, perhaps it was. But whatever it
was, the commissioners made a report that it was impossible to
perform the work For these reasons, and not out of any want
of respect for the chairman of the committee, he moved to lay
the first section of the report on the table.

Mr. CALDWELL asked the gentleman to withdraw the motion
for one moment, (the motion was withdrawn) and said, that he

896 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

intended to make no speech on the subject. His health was such
that he could not do so, and he regretted it exceedingly. He
desired merely to state that he had given the subject a calm con-
sideration for a long time, and was perfectly satisfied as to the
practicability of codifying the common law, as much so as any
other legal department. He felt so feeble that he could not say
more, other than that he hoped the motion would not prevail.

Mr. HAYES said — in reply to the gentleman from Greene —
that he understood the committee on Law Reform to stand five
in favor of the report, five against it, and one undetermined. The
majority of the committee were, it was true, opposed to the report-
ing of the ' 'reasons,' ' which he had prepared.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on laying the first
section on the table, and was decided — yeas 69, nays 53.

Section two was adopted, and

Mr. SCATES moved to reconsider the vote; and it was recon-
sidered.

Mr. HAYES moved to amend the 2d section, by striking out
the three first words, and prefixing to the section the following:

"The General Assembly shall provide for such a codification
of the laws now in force as to them may seem practicable and
expedient, and such code with all the laws hereafter passed' '

Mr. PRATT moved, as a substitute:

"The Legislature, at its first session after the adoption of this
constitution, shall provide for the appointment of one or more
commissioners, whose duty it shall be to revise, reform, simplify
and abridge the rules and practice, pleadings, forms and proceed-
ing, of the courts of this state, and to report thereon to the Legis-
lature, subject to their adoption and modification from time to time.' '

Mr. LOCKWOOD moved to lay the amendments and the
whole report on the table.

And the motion was carried.

Mr. GRIMSHAW offered a resolution that the use of the
Senate chamber be granted to the ladies of the Presbyterian
church, on Friday next. Carried.

And the Convention adjourned till to-morrow at 8 a. m.

LXV. THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847

Prayer by the Rev. Mr. Barger.

Mr. CANADY offered for adoption the following:

Ordered, That the committee on the adjustment and revision
of the articles of the constitution be instructed so to amend the
article on the organization of counties, by striking out of the first
section the following words: "Nor any line of which shall pass
within less than ten miles of the county seat of the county proposed
to be divided, already established.' '

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon raised a point of order. How
long after the Convention had acted finally upon the different
articles could these resolutions of instructions be sent to the com-
mittee? When would the Convention get through with their
business? Every subject could be revived and renewed at any
time in this way. The articles had passed from the convention,
and were now in a state of preparation, and were they ever to be
altered?"

The PRESIDENT, on the authority of certain precedents in
the New York convention, decided the resolution to be in order.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon appealed from the decision of the
chair.

A debate ensued, in which Messrs. Constable, Campbell of
Jo Daviess, and Edwards participated, and before any vote,

Mr. CANADY withdrew his resolution.

Mr. CALDWELL offered the following, as additional rules:

rules

1. The various articles referred to the committee on Revision,
&c., as well as those hereafter referred, shall not be changed,
altered or amended, except to revise and correct the language
thereof.

2. The report of the committee of Revision, when made to
the Convention, shall be taken up, and the amendments of such
committee first considered, and after the action of the Convention

897

898 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

upon such amendments, the question shall then be upon the adop-
tion of the whole report, and no division shall be had.

3. No further business shall be considered, except the reports
now on the table, the report of the committee on Revision, and the
reports of the committees on Schedule and on Address.

Messrs. Campbell of Jo Daviess, Dement, Scates and Wead
opposed the rules. Messrs. Caldwell, Edwards of Madison,
Edwards of Sangamon and Constable advocated their adoption.

Mr. ECCLES moved the previous question, and it was ordered.

The yeas and nays were ordered on the adoption of the rules,
and they were adopted — yeas 113, nays 32.

Mr. SCATES said, that he considered the vote just taken as
the final adoption of the parts of the constitution now in the
hands of the committee; he moved that the committee be directed
to hand the articles as they revised them to the printer, and that
they be printed.

Mr. Dement and Mr. Thomas opposed this motion, and it
was rejected.

The report of the committee on Education was then taken up,
and read as follows:

article —

Section i. The moneys received from the United States
under the provisions of the act of Congress of the 18th day of
April, 1818, for the encouragement of learning, constituting "the
school fund,' ' and that bestowed on a college or university, con-
stituting "the college fund," as well as that arising from the sale
of lands granted for the use of a seminary of learning, constituting
"the seminary fund," with all additions which have been or that
may hereafter be made to said funds, or any of them, shall remain
perpetual funds, and be held by the state for the uses and pur-
poses aforesaid, the annual interest only to be applied to the
support of schools, a college, or seminaries, under the authority of
the General Assembly.

Sec. 2. Officers and trustees having the care or control of any
school, college, or seminary funds, or any school funds of any
township in this state, for investment, may purchase therewith,
or invest the same in the bonds of this state, at their market

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 899

value, under such regulations as the General Assembly may pre-
scribe; and it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to
provide for the prompt payment of the interest on such bonds so
purchased as aforesaid, as the same becomes due; Provided, that
the General Assembly may hereafter prohibit or restrict such in-
vestments, as the public good may require.

Sec. 3. It shall be the duty of the General Assembly to pro-
vide for a system of common schools which shall be as nearly
uniform as may be, throughout the state; and such common schools
shall be equally free to all the children in the state, and no sec-
tarian instruction shall be permitted in any of them.

Sec. 4. The superintendency of public instruction in this state
shall be vested in an officer, to be styled "the superintendent of
common schools," and such county and local superintendents
as may be established by law.

Sec. 5. At the first session of the General Assembly after the
adoption of this constitution, and biennially thereafter, it shall be
the duty of the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of
the senate, (a majority of all the members elected thereto con-
curring therein), to appoint a superintendent of common schools,
who shall hold his office for the term of two years and until his
successor is qualified, and who shall perform such duties and receive
such salary as the General Assembly may prescribe; Provided,
that vacancies occuring in said office by death, resignation, refusal
to act, or otherwise, may be filled by the Governor; and persons
thus appointed shall continue in office until the end of the next
session of the General Assembly.

Sec. 6. The preceding section shall continue in force for the
term of six years from and after the time at which such first ap-
pointment is made in pursuance thereof, and no longer; after which
time, the General Assembly may provide for the continuance of
said office, or for the election of such officer by the people.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess moved to strike out the 4th
and 5th sections, and insert the following:

"The supervision of public instruction shall be vested in a state
superintendent, and such other officers as the General Assembly
may direct. The state superintendent shall be elected by the
qualified voters of the state, who shall hold his office for the term

900 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

of three years, and shall receive a salary of one thousand and five
hundred dollars. The General Assembly shall provide for the
filling of vacancies in the office of state superintendent. The
duties and powers of the state superintendent shall be prescribed
and defined by law."

Mr. CAMPBELL said, that he approached this question with
no inconsiderable embarrassment; he was perfectly aware of the
impatience of the Convention and the desire to hasten the adjourn-
ment. The experience of the last week, and the hurry with which
it has disposed of business, shows that the Convention is but little
disposed to hear discussion upon any subject. He also deemed
it necessary to explain the reasons of this report not having been
made by himself, as he was the chairman of the committee on
Education. Entertaining different views from the majority of the
committee, he could not coincide with them in the report which
has been submitted. He had requested Mr. Palmer, secretary of
the committee, to report to the Convention the conclusions of the
committee. It was, however, well known to the Convention that
this subject has not been discussed here, that at no time has it been
considered in this body; and it was also well known that no other
question has ever occupied more of the public attention, or has
excited more discussion among the people at large than this — the
creation of the office of state superintendent of public instruction,
with an adequate salary. From all sections of the state, the people
have presented, by their representatives, their petitions for this
purpose. If it be the wish of the delegates here, if it be the desire
of the Convention to meet the wishes of the people, and to secure
for the instrument we are about to frame a favorable reception,
it becomes us to make such provisions as they can approve of, and
which above all others they desire at our hands. He knew dis-
cussion was not wanted here by many; he knew that the great
body of the Convention were anxious to hurry through with the
business, and go home; and he knew that there were many here
who would vote against the provision, without having any dis-
cussion upon it. But he had a solemn duty to perform, a duty
that he could not, would not, disregard, and one that could not
be performed in the limited time allowed by the fifteen minute
rule. He would, therefore, apply himself to that duty as well as

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 901

his feeble efforts would permit, though he knew the fifteen minute
rule of the Convention would not afford sufficient time for that
purpose. He would not propose to discuss this question now, had
it been discussed here at any time before, or had the subject been
submitted to the committee of the whole, like other questions, for
a general discussion; but he felt the importance of the subject,
and the anxiety of the people in regard to it, and he hoped that
time would be allowed. He well knew, and gentlemen must admit,
that when they went home and mingled with their constituents,
spoke of the proceedings of this Convention, and of the debates,
and told them that the great subject of education, when before
this body, came under the operation of the fifteen minute rule,
the people would not be satisfied, would not be content that a
subject in which they were so much concerned, in which their
children were so deeply interested, had come under the operation
of that rule, and discussion cut off. It may be said that these
petitions that have been presented here, praying the appointment
of this officer, are not entitled to any weight, that they have all
come from one source, and that that fact should be a cause for
opposition to it. It was perhaps true that these petitions were all
sent out from the office of the Prairie Farmer, and that they
obtained a circulation and an influence in consequence of the
exertions of that office, but was that any argument against the
thing itself? Because a paper had taken a course on this sub-
ject which was good and beneficial, and which had for its object
the benefit of the people, was that object to be denounced in con-
sequence of the party character of its advocates? No, sir; no!
As the soul rises into immortality when the body falls into decay
and perishes, so does the cause of education rise in splendor and
grandeur above all party schemes and factions. It is the cause
he advocated, he cared not who were its supporters; he looked to
the object sought by these petitions, and not at the source whence
they came. Much as he desired to discuss the general question
fully and thoroughly, he would, for the present and under the
circumstances, confine himself to the importance of the office of a
state superintendent, with what he considered a sufficient salary.
By way of ilhistrating the importance of the office, and of the various
duties of the superintendent would have to perform, he would

902 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

read what he considered would constitute a portion of those duties,
and make such comments as would appear necessary.

1st. To visit as often and as far as practicable every county
in the state, for the purpose of inspecting schools, and diffusing
as widely as possible, by public addresses and personal communi-
cation with school officers, teachers and parents, a knowledge of
existing defects and desirable improvements in the administration
of the system, and the government and instruction of the schools.

This would be one of the first duties of the superintendant,
to visit the several portions and counties of the state in order
to discover the defects, and by practical information point out
the remedies. It was unnecessary for him to refer to the present
system as now organized. It was useless. Does not every one
admit that although our statute books are filled with law after
law, yet no single good has been effected in the system, and all
efforts to adopt or prove a good standard have failed. Does not
every one admit the glaring truth that thousands upon thousands
of dollars have been squandered in the name of education, and
yet no mark has been left for its practical benefit. The cause of
this is that there has been no head, that no one has been charged
specially with the duties of superintendant, but it has been
left in the hands of other persons who had other duties to perform.
Such had been the case when the report of the last superintend-
ant, then Secretary of State, was presented to the last Legis-
lature; he was charged with other and primary duties, his time
wasfullyengagedwith the duties of his office; and [he]could not visit
the diflFerent sections of the state, examine into those matters of
difficulty and cause of failure, nor [was he] able to point out the
proper mode of avoiding evils, and of promoting good; he could not
bring himself into communion with the teachers and parents of the
children, nor make those suggestions so necessary; he was only
able to address a few circulars to the commissioners upon general
matters, and there, so far as he was concerned, the subject dropped.

Another particular he would call the attention of the Conven-
tion to was, that this officer would travel over the state, visit
every county, make addresses on the subject at every school dis-
trict and awaken public sentiment upon the subject of educa-
tion.— From a well directed public sentiment the most beneficial

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 903

effects would flow, and until that was excited it was in vain to
speak of the benefits of common schools. Appoint this officer
and let him commence his visits. In each county it will be known
for weeks before hand that he is to come there and address them,
and the people will gather to the county seat on that day, teachers
and parents, and they will go away with feelings roused and
directed to the promotion of the ends of education. In this way
that public sentiment, so necessary, will be excited in behalf of
the cause; they will go home after these addresses, with their
minds drawn to the subject; school associations will be formed in
each district, having for their end the benefit and advancement of
the cause, and immense and incalculable benefits will follow.
And are gentlemen prepared to say that all this is of no good?
That the efforts of this officer in this respect will be of no beneficial
result? There is not a county in the state that he may not visit
in the space of two years, and his visits, if he be a good, a faithful
and a competent officer, will always produce these results. As
an evidence of the experience of this fact in another state, he read
to the Convention an extract from the report of Mr. Barnard,
a talented and accomplished gentleman, who had held this post in
the state of Rhode Island. Speaking of these visits, he says:

"Immediately after entering on the duties of my appointment,
I commenced holding a series of meetings, of such persons as
were disposed to come together on public notice, in the several
towns of the state, for familiar and practical addresses and dis-
cussions, on topics connected with the organization and adminis-
tration of the school system, and the classification, instruction
and discipline of public schools. (Appendix, Number 11). These
meetings which I have continued from time to time as frequently
as my strength would allow, have been numerously attended, and
the addresses have proved useful in awakening public interest,
and disseminating information as to the best modes of improving
popular education. When the meetings already appointed have
been held, more than five hundred addresses will have been made
by myself, and others invited by me; and at least one meeting will
have been held in every large neighborhood in every town in the
state."

Here we have the opinion of a distinguished gentleman, who,

904 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

in the discharge of his duties, and his whole course on this subject
has been actuated by as highly philanthrophic motives and opin-
ions as any one, who has ever written on the subject; and he says
that the people will attend and take interest in these addresses.
And will gentlemen say that the people of Illinois are different in
their feelings and sentiments from the rest of the Union on this
subject — that they are less conscious and awake to the importance
of the subject as regards the welfare of their children and of the
state, than the people of any other state? Will they contend
that the moment a man places his foot upon the soil of Illinois,
that he becomes lost to all those sentiments of refinement, of virtue,
of honest pride and satisfaction, in beholding the improvement of
the mind, and the expansion of the intellectual resources of his
fellowmen? If so, then they cast unjust reflection upon the
character of the people of Illinois.

2d. To recommend the best text books, and secure an
uniformity as far as practicable, in the schools of at least every
county in the state, and to assist, when called upon, in the estab-
lishment of, and the selection of books for school libraries.

Here is another and important duty, which the Legislature
will, undoubtedly, provide for, to enable him to furnish text
books of an uniform character, throughout the state, or at least in
each county.- — This reform is most certainly called for, and by no
one can it be effected so well as by this superintendent; who, from
the information he will derive from a constant intercourse with
the people, can accomplish that which hitherto has been impossi-
ble.— Again, public prejudices will be consulted, and if there are
sections of the state where people have a preference for one kind
of books over that of another, and believe that the ends of edu-
cation can be accomplished better by them, than others, why
they will be allowed to retain them, and the uniformity can be
gradually effected. Much good will result from this uniformity
in the textbooks of the schools throughout the whole state. The
superintendent was required, when called upon, to aid the district
associations, in selecting a library for the use of the people. There
was, in his opinion, no branch of the system of education of [more]
practical benefit than these libraries. What is the use of teaching a
man how to read, unless you give him the means of turning that

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 905

knowledge to advantage, of improving himself by practising what
you have taught him. It is like rearing a young man to a trade,
sending him for a term of years to learn the mysteries, and acquire
a knowledge of some art or trade, and then deny him the means
of carrying on that trade. Like teaching a man the trade of a
blacksmith, or some other such art, and then bid him go without
tools. Take away from him the tools and implements, necessary
to his trade, and you place him in the same situation as the man
whom you have taught to read. Of what use is the learning you
have bestowed upon him if there is not placed within his reach
the means and opportunity to turn that information to some use
and benefit to himself. He contended, then, that this branch,
the duties which he would have to perform in aiding these library
associations to make selections of good and useful books, had
much to do with the subject of education, and the promotion of
general knowledge among the people. He, a man of information
and taste, will be of great advantage to them; his selections will
be such as will be beneficial to those who read them; not altogether
children's books, but historical, scientific, and other valuable
books, calculated to be of general use, will be chosen by him to
fill these libraries. In this way, as these books will be in the reach
of all, you will create, throughout the state, a general desire for
reading and information, which will be a successful consequence
following your common schools. These libraries will not be
dependent alone on the resources of the districts, they will
be enlarged and increased by donations of books from men who,
having the means, will feel proud to contribute to anything cal-
culated to be beneficial to the people, and to increase their infor-
mation, and advance the march of mind.

3d. To appoint such and so many inspectors in each county,
as he shall, from time to time, deem necessary, to examine all
persons offering themselves as candidates for teaching public
schools.

Here we find another and most important duty which this
superintendent will perform and one which has led to much
trouble and dissatisfaction. Last year the Legislature was of
opinion that the qualifications of teachers were, as fixed by law,
too high, and that it was difficult to find men of the required quali-

9o6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

fications who would become teachers. When he, as Secretary of
State, was ex officio superintendent of schools, he received
many letters on this subject from different sections of the state,
all complaining that the law had fixed the qualifications too high,
and of the difficulties in the way of getting teachers. They also
stated that the people had men not possessing the required quali-
fications, who they were willing to have as teachers of their children
and in whose competency for that office they had confidence.

What is the difference on this point, in the eastern states?
The same reason that causes them to have plenty of teachers,
competent and qualified to the task, would also exist in Illinois.
They have established in every state, normal schools, where there
are annually a number of young men and women, prepared for the
important duty of teachers. He did not propose that such schools
shall be established by the state at the present time; the condition
and circumstances of the state were not such as would support
them to any advantage, for the state has not the means to carry
it out. But there was a mode, in which, to some extent, the
advantages of these schools, might be realized. Teachers' insti-
tutes might be established in the different sections of the state,
where the persons who perform this important task, could assemble
together, at some convenient point in the spring and autumn.
During the vacation time of each year, they can select some
person, distinguished for his competency and qualifications as a
teacher, to preside over them and their studies, who will give
such instruction, advice, and make such suggestions as will render
them competent and qualified teachers. — These institutes will hold
regular sessions for a fortnight or more, and this person, whom
they will select to preside over them, will deliver lectures to them;
they will form themselves into classes, study lessons, and prepare
recitations, as is done in our schools. In this way, until such
time as the state may be in a condition to establish these normal
schools, these teachers' institutes may be formed. The duty of
a teacher was one of the greatest importance to the character of
the people. — It is not the most talented, or the most learned, that
make the best teachers. To become a teacher, qualified to im-
part instruction to the youth, requires long practice, training of
the mind, and close application to the attainments of these requi-

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 907

sites, so necessary to become a useful teacher. It has become an
art which requires study and training of the mind to a peculiar
turn, independent of mere learning, and cannot be acquired with-
out.— -Who now choose your teachers? Who exercises that dis-
crimination and care, so important in selecting proper persons
to advance your youth in the paths of education? School com-
missioners. They are but rarely chosen for that office with a view
to their competency in selecting the best or most qualified and
competent men as teachers. And hence the importance of this
duty of the superintendent, whose particular duty it will be to
provide each district with competent persons to select teachers
qualified for the importance of their undertaking.

4. To grant certificates of qualification to such teachers as
have been approved by one or more county inspectors, and shall
give satisfactory evidence of their moral characters, attainments
and ability to govern and instruct children.

5. To submit to the General Assembly at each regular session
a report, containing, together with an account of his own doings,
a statement of the condition of the public schools, and the means
and progress of popular education in the state; plans and sugges-
tions for their improvement; such other matters relating to the
duties of his office as he may deem useful and proper to communi-
cate.

It will be his duty, at the meeting of every General Assembly,
to make to them a report of everything connected with his office.
He will have been in correspondence with persons in all sections
of the state, in correspondence with the teachers, with those per-
sons selected in each county to examine the teachers, with parents,
and with all those persons who feel an interest in the question, and
will be able, from the information derived from all these
sources and from his visits and personal observation, to discover
such improvements in the system as will be salutary and bene-
ficial to the advancement of the great cause of education, and the
dissemination of its benefits throughout the state. — The Legis-
lature at the present time have not the means to acquire this
information, nor this opportunity of receiving those suggestions
that will be likely to produce salutary measures that are necessary.
He, in the performance of the various duties of the office, will

9o8 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

travel over the whole state, from county to county, gathering at
each place all such information as may be practically beneficial,
and communicate it all to the Legislature, upon which then they
can base their action. And this, in his opinion, is the only way
that we can ever arrive at any just conclusions, at any correct
system of common schools, and one that will accomplish its great
object.

6. To adjust and decide without appeal and without cost to
the parties, all controversies and disputes arising under the school
law, which may be submitted to him for settlement and decision.
This, sir, is also an important feature in the duties which this
superintendent will be required to perform. This is taken from
the New York school system, and in that state has been found
productive of the very best results. Do we not all know the
frequent occurrences of these quarrels and disputes in relation to
this matter in the different townships and counties? We all
know how these controversies arise, with what feeling they are
carried on, to what lengths they are extended. In this way they
will all be settled without cost to the parties, and before they are
ripened into feuds between neighborhoods, or produced litiga-
tion, cost and excitement, which, as is frequently the case, has
destroyed and broken up the schools entirely. Under this super-
intendent's care, these disputes are stopped in their incipient
stage, and they are submitted to him for decision, and his decision
is final, and this, too, without cost to either party. How much
better is this state of things than the present system. This super-
intendent can settle all complaints, and by this means avoid all
those quarrels which tend so much to injure the cause of educa-
tion, and retard the progress of learning, virtue and morality. In
this way all cost is saved, and useless litigation obviated.

7. To prepare suitable forms and regulations for making all
reports, and conducting all necessary proceedings under the law,
and to transmit the same, with [such] instructions as he shall deem
necessary and proper for the uniform and thorough administration
of the school system, to the school commissioner of each county,
for distribution among the officers required to execute them.

In this branch of the duties of this superintendent we have
an important duty for him to perform. In this particular the

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 909

system that we now have has been much deficient, and will tend
much to reform and improve any system. Heretofore all infor-
mation from the school commissioners and teachers has been re-
ceived in answer to interrogatories addressed them, and of necessity
incomplete and unsatisfactory, and but little calculated to convey
correct bases on which to found or suggest improvements.

8. To submit plans and directions for erecting and fitting up
school houses.

This duty will be found to be one most intimately connected
with the advancement of education. The building and erecting
of suitable school houses for the instruction of the youth of the
state, has been a source of much difficulty to all concerned. —
In the erection of the school houses in this state convenience and
comfort has never been consulted. When you send a boy to
school with the expectation that he will learn something, you
must have him comfortable. You must not require him to sit
there for three or four hours at a time, upon an oak bench, full of
knot holes, without anything for him to rest against, with, per-
haps, a hot stove in front of him, burning him up on one side, while
the open door or the apertures between the logs admit the cold and
biting air, freezing him on the other. In such school houses your
children cannot be comfortable. He is compelled to sit there
half the day, under the fiat of the teacher, unable to move his
limbs, until his turn arrives to recite his lessons, and as soon as
that is over, returns to his seat. — Boys will not learn in such places.
They will not, cannot, study when they are not comfortable; they
soon acquire a hatred for the school, become dissatisfied with it,
and when they do so, it is impossible for them to study, and the
result is, that they either stay away one-half the time, or go there
with minds indisposed to study or to application. In this way
the intention of the schools is defeated, and the desires of parents
are disappointed. On no point is a reform more needed than on
this, as school houses erected with a view to comfort and conven-
ience are essentially necessary for the practical advantages of
your school system.

These are only a few of the most important duties which this
state superintendent will be required to perform; but, he asked, if
even those he had enumerated were carried out and performed,

91 o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

would he not work great benefit and advantage to the system, to
those concerned in its results, and to the character of the whole
people? And that this superintendent will perform the various
duties of his office there could be no doubt. No one could doubt
but he will do all his duty, will take a pride and an interest in so
doing, for his actions, his efforts in the cause, will be under an eye
ever open to the welfare and success of the great cause in which
the whole body of the people are interested, and who will expect
so much from him, and he, knowing this, will not dare to neglect
any opportunity of advancing the interests of education, nor be,
in the least important point, derelict in his duty.

In connection with this subject he read an extract from a
letter written to the Hon. John Henry on the subject of common
schools, as follows:

"i. In this state we began at the wrong end. — We have spent
millions to pay the miserable teachers whom we found in the
exercise of the profession, when the common school system was
adopted, and to carry out the expensive details of a complicated
system, but never gave a dollar or a thought to the indispensable
prerequisite of teaching the teachers. Hence, the slow progress of
our system into public favor.

"2. In the next place, we hitched on the supervision of the
system the political office of Secretary of State, and have thus sub-
jected its fate to the political fears of every administration. Thus,
though no officer has been base enough to prostitute the system
to political purposes, yet, scarcely anyone has been brave enough
to encounter political risk or odium in its behalf."

Here, sir, is the opinion of a distinguished citizen of Penn-
sylvania, who has given much attention to the subject, and who
says that they have squandered millions of money without pro-
ducing the least good, because no thought was ever given to the
important point of selecting competent teachers. And that
the cause has been retarded and the interests of education injured
because the superintendency of the system has been hitched on
to the political office of a Secretary of State. This, sir, is what we
have done in Illinois. Instead of making an independent depart-
ment, whose whole attention would be devoted to the subject,
we have hitched it on to the political office of our Secretary of

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 9"

State; and unless we make this superintendent an independent,
constitutional officer, it will always be attached to the office of
Secretary of State or some other political office, and we will find
that no one will hold the office more than two years, for he will
be under the control and dictation of party influences. The
letter further says:

' 'Instead of bringing the powers of an able and zealous press
to bear in its favor, nearly all the papers in the state have from
the same political fears, held aloof from its advocacy, or only
afforded an occasional cold word of praise. From our mistakes
I would say learn wisdom.' '

This remark, sir, will apply as truly to the press of Illinois;
we, too, have had our press engaged in political strife, in party
warfare, in working dissensions among the people, in urging
them to party measures and advancing their political schemes,
while the great question of education has been lost sight of by
them, and it has been abandoned to its private friends. This
subject would, however, be taken up by them, it will be discussed,
and the great influence of their power will be felt, if we but carry
out this reform.

Mr. C. here read further extracts from a letter written by a
gentleman in Boston, in relation to the establishment of good
primary schools in the west, and the means of acquiring good
teachers both male and female from the east. He also read the
following from a report made by Professor Stowe of Ohio,
who was appointed by that state to visit and report the various
systems of common school education in Europe, after detailing in
full the information he received, he speaks of what has been done
in Ohio, and says:

"To follow up this great object, the Legislature has wisely
made choice of a superintendent whose untiring labors and dis-
interested zeal are worthy of all praise. But no great plan can
be carried through in a single year; and if the superintendent is to
have opportunity to do what is necessary, and to preserve that
independence and energy of official character which is requisite to
the successful discharge of his duties, he should hold his office for
the same term and on the same conditions, as the judges of the
supreme court.

912 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

"Every officer engaged in this, or in every other public work,
should receive a suitable compensation for his services. This
justice requires, and it is the only way to secure fidelity and effi-
ciency."

Here we have the opinion of this distinguished gentleman who
has devoted a long life to the study, who has visited all Europe,
and examined and enquired everywhere into the various systems
of the world, and he says ' 'the state has acted wisely in appointing
a state superintendent." And why not? This is an important
branch of a government — the instruction of her children, and it
is as important that it should have a head, that it should be as
independent as that we should have an executive or judges. Are
gentlemen prepared for the mere saving of a few dollars to abandon
this? Are they prepared to place in the scales a few paltry dollars
and cents, with the enlightenment of the human mind, and permit
them to weigh it down? He hoped not. He would regret that
the Convention, under the pretext of saving a few dollars, would
forego the immense benefits this superintendent would produce in
their system of Education. If he were selected by the state to
devise the best, the surest, the most effectual way of clearing the
state from her debt, he would seize upon the whole of the re-
sources of the state, and turn them all to the one great current —
the education of her people, to the enlightenment of the public
mind, and to the dissemination of knowledge, of virtue, of moral-
ity. They would then be filled with an honest, an anxious desire
to rise in their strength of moral force and power, urged on by its
instinctive moral principle; they would not cease in their exertions
till the whole of the vast debt was cleared away, and the dark
gloom that overhangs them was dispelled. It is the policy of
governments to educate their children. Let us educate the people.
One bad legislator will do more harm — tear down and destroy
more than ten good ones can build up and erect. Let us educate
the people for the important task of being their own legislators.
In a republican government like the one in which we lived, he
considered it a paramount duty to instruct and educate the people
for the social and civil conditions of society; every person was
called upon to discharge his share of duty to his country, and
it was a proper obligation on the government to educate him that

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 913

he might do so with honor to himself and his state. Educate the
people and no bad legislators will be chosen, and the state will
realize far more benefit than by such saving of expense as is con-
tended for here, when you oppose this office on account of the
salary. Mr. C. then read the following extract of a letter from
Governor Slade, addressed to him since the meeting of the Con-
vention:

"Nothing, it seems to me, in laying the foundations of a repub-
lican state, can be of more importance than a provision for secur-
ing the devoted application of some single mind to the special
purpose of advancing the interests of education. With all the
interest felt in New England on this subject, we have greatly failed
in this particular, and have wasted hundreds of thousands of
dollars upon defective systems of instruction, and unqualified,
inefficient teachers, for the want of that systematic attention to
the subject which can be secured only by a superintendency of
public instruction, such as the states referred to have wisely pro-
vided for in their constitutions. It has not been until within a
few years that we have discovered the error, and taken measures
to remedy it. I hope that Illinois will not follow the example of
our long neglect of our true interests in this particular."

This, sir, is from a gentleman who has been appointed secre-
tary of the board of education, at Cincinnati, to furnish teachers
for such places as may require them. A man who has given the
subject the benefit of a long and thorough examination, and whose
experience is sufficient to demand for his opinion every weight
and consideration. Is his opinion to have no weight upon this
question ? It has been said that his opinion should have no weight,
that it is valueless, and should be disregarded because he has inter-
ested motives in recommending what he does. Sir, we should
care nothing for the motive. I care not who is the deviser of the
system, who it is that recommends it, provided that I am satisfied
the thing itself is good in its operation — good in all its results.
I care not, if they send us good and competent teachers to in-
struct our youth, to light up in their minds the fires of intellect,
what their motive may be. Nor do I stop, when satisfied that
the result will be productive of good to the people, whether their
motives be interested or not. What should we care if they be

914 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

interested, they are certainly interested in a good cause, and one
the motives for which are honorable and praiseworthy. Why,
then, should we care if they do make money by sending forth, over
the land, men and women to enlighten the minds of their fellow
men, so the object to be attained, and the grand result to be
accomplished, is one of so much good. They are perfectly wel-
come to do so.

As an example of the benefits of the system under the super-
vision of this state superintendent, let us take the sum of $100,000
and appropriate it for educational purposes and measures, in the
manner we have done for years, and are doing at present, with no
particular person charged with its distribution, its appropriation
to the particular objects intended that it should be applied to, and
how far does it go — what good will it accomplish? Take $50,000
and disburse it throughout the state to proper persons, appointed
and selected by this superintendent as men qualified to act as
agents, to be applied by them, under his supervision, to the speci-
fied duties, objects and measures prescribed by law, and a full
account of which to be rendered to him, and by him to the General
Assembly, and my word for it there will be ten times the amount
of good effected, as would be by the $100,000 under the present
loose and irresponsible system, as now practiced and in operation.
Why, sir, the ordinary business of life is carried on by agents,
selected for their competency and capacity to discharge these
duties, and they are all under the supervision of some head — some
principal. A man in business — does he not select his book-keeper
with an eye to his competency and qualification, and exercise over
him a supervision. Clerks and agents to transact our business all
discharge their duties in this mode, and why should we have it
in all other affairs except this — the most sacred of all, the educa-
tion of our people. In the amendment he had offered he had
fixed the salary of this superintendent at what he considered an
adequate compensation to secure a good officer and a strict attend-
ance to his business, the sum of $1,500 a year. And will gentle-
men complain of it as too high? Will gentlemen say that the
people of the state will complain if they raise this office, and
provide that the salary shall be $1,500 a year? — Are they
prepared to go home to their constituents and tell them that

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 915

they refused to provide in the constitution this office, because
of the expense it would incur. Is any man upon this floor afraid
that when he goes home, after voting for this amendment, and
meets with his constituents, that they will say to him, why did
you vote for this; we would rather you should vote ^1,500 dollars
[sic] a year to a superintendent of our schools [than] have our
children remain under the deep and dark gloom of ignorance which
at present hangs upon them. Does any man here fear the people
will say this to him? No, sir. Is there a single delegate in this
Convention who will pretend that if he votes for this superintend-
ent, with a salary of |i,5oo a year, that his constituents will
murmur or complain of his vote; that they will for a moment
hesitate to approve of the act; that they will say to him, "we sent
you to the Convention for no such purpose as this, we wanted, we
desired, we asked for no such office; we wanted you to attend to
the other business, and not to provide an officer, with sufficient
salary, to promote the cause of education, and the instruction with
advantage to our children? Does anyone pretend that they will
say we wanted no improvement in our system of common schools,
no reform in their operation, no change for the better in their
practical effect? No, sir; there is not a man who will dare to
utter such a reflection upon the character of the people. The sum
of |i,5oo is not too much. This officer will be engaged the whole
year, he will have to travel from one end of the state to the other,
will have to deliver lectures and addresses in every county (one
hundred in number) in the state, will be absent for a great portion
of his time from home and his family, and this sum will not be
found too much. Compare, then, the salary of ^1,500 a year with
the immense benefits that will flow from his administration of the
duties, with the great improvements that he will make, with the
complete reform of our present inefficient system, and above all,
with great saving from the inconsiderate expenditures now made;
and then will you say that $1,500 a year is too much? Suppose,
sir, that the vast number of children of this state who have not
had the benefits of education, and on whose infant minds its light
has never dawned, were arrayed in one body before this conven-
tion, would not the sight elicit the warmest emotions of the soul,
and cause the mind of every one here to make the inquiry, is it

9i6 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

not our duty, our highest duty, to provide for the education and
moral cultivation of this mighty power that is rising up and soon
will stand in our places in this hall? Such a spectacle is not possi-
ble, however, but the mind may picture it; and before the mind of
every delegate they may be arrayed, in all their growing strength
and ignorance. Look at the returns of the last census of this state;
in the large number who have no education, you can see a fact
that points out too clearly the necessity for this state superintend-
ent. This office of state superintendent, in his opinion, would
be the saving clause of this constitution. Many provisions had
been inserted in it that were obnoxious to many portions of the
people. Already do we find them taking sides against its adoption,
we find their presses out in opposition to many of its provisions,
and this opposition, too, came from a quarter where the cause of
education has been much neglected. Adopt this, and we have
one feature which the whole people will rejoice and be glad to
support — one which will be to them, perhaps, a sufficient reason
to overlook other provisions to which they are hostile, and which
they would be content with rather than lose this. This considera-
tion reminded him of another, equally important. What would be-
come of the constitution itself, unless it was sustained by the
intelligence and morality of the people, which depended on their
means of education. The rights of men had for their sole protec-
tion the creation of just laws, and they could only be founded and
sustained upon the dissemination of virtue and knowledge among
the people. And shall it be said that one of the states of the
greatest republic that has ever existed, in Convention to frame the
organic law of the land, has adopted a constitution without a
single provision in it for the promotion of education, or for the
instruction and enlightenment of the minds of the people? Let
gentlemen look abroad over the land, let them see what other
states have done, what other nations, governed by a widely
different policy, have done for the education of their people, and
it is calculated to bring the blush of shame to our cheek. Let
them look at the monarchies of Europe and see what they are
doing to strengthen themselves by the education of their people.
Let them look at Prussia, famed all over the world for the
extent and benefit of her common schools, and the liberality of

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 917

her views upon education; and Prussia is an absolute monarchy!
The same spirit has prompted the government of Bavaria, and
she has taken steps that will eventually lead to the education and
instruction of her people.

All over Europe, from Poland to Siberia, from the shores of
the White Sea, to the regions beyond the Caucasus, there is a
system of complete common school education established. The
sun of education is pouring down its refulgent rays upon that
benighted and frozen region. France, too, has her normal schools,
and her system of common schools. Austria is not behind the
educational spirit that is characterizing the age. She, too, has
her system in full operation. The Sultan of Turkey, and Pacha
of Egypt have been moved by its power and the calling for teachers.
In Constantinople, there has been established a society for the
diffusion of knowledge, and there are, at this time, in Paris and
London, Turks and Greeks, and Arabs, preparing themselves for
the important task of teaching in their respective countries. In
those countries, the office of a teacher, of an instructor of youth,
is an honorable one, respected by the people and the laws. In
Prussia, when these teachers get old, unable to perform their sacred
duty longer, or when they die, a pension is conferred upon their
children. Such is not the case here. We hold out no inducements,
either by social or public laws, for making the office of a teacher
an honorable or a profitable one.

In this question he felt a deep and abiding interest, and felt
satisfied that the whole people were as equally interested. To
test the question before the Convention he had drawn up his
amendment. Why [did] not then the gentleman from Jeffisrson
either vote for or against the amendment, and not embarrass it with
his motion to amend. He can as well accomplish his end by vot-
ing against it, as by encumbering the constitution with any
useless provision that the Legislature "may" do this &c.,
which they have the power to do without any such provision.

He well remembered that but a short time ago gentlemen were
loud and pertinacious in placing upon the Legislature every kind
of restriction; that they then declared the necessity of providing
in the constitution in express terms what the Legislature should
not do, and prescribing also what they should do, for they said

91 8 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

that no confidence was to be placed in the Legislature, and that it
could not be reasonably expected it would ever do anything that
was good, and would be continually running into evil if not re-
strained. This had been the position of gentlemen, and the
gentleman from Jefferson among others. Why then does he em-
barrass this amendment with his proposal to insert "may" instead
of ' 'shall ?' ' Why do gentlemen desire on this question so impor
tant, and so necessary to be carried into effect, why do they desire
to leave the whole matter open to the Legislature? What more
auspicious moment than the present to adopt this system — where
will you have such another opportunity? Why delay the good
work? Iowa, Wisconsin and Ohio have this state superintendent,
and must Illinois be behind all the rest? New York has not adopt-
ed it. Why she has not done so, can be accounted for, she has
a system of education and common schools perfect in itself and it
requires no hand to reform it, as does our own. We propose this
office of state superintendent as an experiment. It is not proposed as
a permanent thing in the constitution to be fixed there unalter-
ably, it provides that the office shall exist for six years, and then
if the people are not satisfied with it, it may be abandoned. He
thought that six years would not be sufficient time to test the
question, that in that period the superintendent would not be able
to produce such results as would show the benefits of his adminis-
tration, but the committee say that it will, and have reported this
period and he was willing to go for it, and to risk the question.
Will not gentlemen allow us to try the experiment even for this
period; will they not lay aside their prejudices and permit us to
try it, and if it does not succeed it may be abandoned.

He was'of opinion that this superintendent should be elected
by the people; that he should be perfectly independent of the
other branches of the government, and that the choice should be
left with the people themselves; but the gentleman from Madison
(Mr. Edwards) and the rest of the committee says that he should
be appointed by the Governor and Senate, and if this be the
opinion of the majority of the Convention, he would not
hesitate to vote for it in that shape. If those who have the cause
of education so much at heart think the superintendent should be
appointed by the Governor and Senate he would agree, but he

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 919

appealed to the Convention to give them the office in some way.
His only object, his only desire, was that the superintendent
should be provided for, and cared but little how he was chosen.
He only desired to have the office created by the constitution,
fixed permanently, made an independent department, above and
beyond interference, and cared nothing particularly how you
provided for his choice.

In behalf of this object he appealed to the friends of economy
and retrenchment, they who desired to carry them into all the
departments of the government, to come forward and give their
support to this superintendent. If they sincerely desired to pro-
mote retrenchment and economy let them vote for this great
auxil[i]ary in the cause of education and enlightenmentof the people.
Prodigality, extravagance and dishonesty were the results always
attendant upon ignorance; but virtue, economy and justice were
the sure results of intelligence, when lighted up by the holy glow
of education. Therefore he appealed to the friends of retrench-
ment to come to his aid and support this proposition, whose object
was to increase the intelligence, the morality and virtue of the
people. If he were called upon for a scheme to promote the prin-
ciples of economy and retrenchment, to present them in all their
truth and importance to the people, he would advocate this system
having for its end the education of the whole people, the increase
of their intelligence, the enlightenments of their mind, and the
dissemination of moral and virtuous knowledge among them.

He appealed to those among the delegates in the Convention,
who were so nobly and generously the advocates of temperance,
to come forward and support this. Nothing could be a more
powerful aid to their efforts in the advancement of their benevo-
lent cause than the education of the people, and the increase of
their intelligence.

To those engaged in the sacred cause of Christianity, to
those who are laboring to spread abroad over the land its light and
its glory, he would earnestly appeal to come forward and support
this proposition. They would find that it would aid them more
in the great cause they were engaged in, by elevating the mind of
the people to a degree that would enable them to comprehend
more fully the sacred principles of their cause, and teach it to look

920 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

above to its author and founder, with feelings awakened by the
influence of education and moral instruction. He asked them then
to come forward and adopt this.

Oh! that he had a voice that would reach in tones of persuasive
eloquence the ears of all the parents within the bounds of the
state, he would implore them to awake from the long night of
sleep, and fly to the support of education and to the rescue of their
children. Oh! that he could present to their view, the dfestiny of
those, who were bone of their bone, and flesh of their flesh, when
they left their parental roof with minds shrouded in ignorance,
and morals shaped for vice, with no enlightened perception to
select the path of virtue from the path of evil; stepping from crime
to crime, until their course closes in the prison cell of degradation,
or perhaps the parent, in seeking his child, tracks him in blood to
the scaff"old of execution. It is then that the never dying worm
of remorse seizes upon the aching conscience, it is then, when all
is lost, that duties unperformed rise up in hideous array, and vex
with horrid tortures the parent who has thus neglected the edu-
cation of his children.

Look, said Mr. C, at the other side of the picture, and you will
see, traced in colors upon which the moral eye delights to dwell,
the man whose mind has received the early impress of education,
and the moral direction and tone which knowledge gives to charac-
ter. His course through life is marked with purity, virtue and
honor. If even poor the path of preferment has been opened and
pointed out to him, there is no place or position to which he may
not aspire. And when in after years he has clambered up from
shelf to shelf, until he has reached the nakedest pinnacle of them
all, he can look back and trace his starting point to the district
common school, and to the kind parent whose ever waking solici-
tude for the welfare, prosperity and happiness of his child, did not
permit the beneficial opportunities which the glorious system of
common schools aff"ords to pass unimproved. With what calm
composure and resignation can such a parent shuffle ofi^ the mortal
care which binds him to earth and sever with ease the dearest tie,
the tie that unites the parent to his child. He is then satisfied
with the realization of his brightest and purest anticipations, that
hope itself, that great sunshine principle and might incentive to

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 1847 921

virtuous action, folds its downy pinions in sublime and lofty re-
pose.

Let then the sun of education be made to shine upon this
people, and its enlightening rays will soon dispel the murky fogs
of ignorance and superstition through which so many of our people
are compelled to creep, in abjectness and in misery from the cradle
to the grave.

Mr. ATHERTON made some remarks in opposition to the
state superintendent, urging that we had not the means to pay
him, and that the people could get along well enough under their
present system, had they more means. And closed by moving to
lay the subject on the table.

The question was divided so as to vote first on laying the
amendment of Mr. Campbell on the table, and rejected, and then
on laying the 4th and 5th sections on the table, and it was also
rejected.

Mr. GREEN of Tazewell advocated the adoption of a provi-
sion for a state superintendent of instruction, and in the course
of his remarks congratulated the gentleman from Jo Daviess upon
his better judgment, as expressed to-day in relation to the
intelligence and principles of education of the people of Rhode
Island, and assured the gentleman that the adoption of a system
of education followed by that state would result in the inculcation
of the same liberal and patriotic political principles of that state.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to amend the substitute
by making it read, ' 'The Legislature may provide for the appoint-
ment of a state superintendent of public instruction."

Mr. SCATES opposed the whole system, and then on motion
of

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison the Convention adjourned till
to-morrow at 8 a. m.

LXVI. FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1847

Prayer by Rev. Mr. Barger.

The question pending, at the adjournment yesterday, was on
the amendment offered by Mr. Davis of Montgomery.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL said, the general system of common
school education, as adopted by our state, will do more in suppress-
ing vice and immorality throughout this country, than all the
punishment that can be inflicted upon the transgressor by our
statutes. Yes, sir, all attempts that are made to improve the
general condition of the human family, will fail in the end, or
be but partially accomplished, until the dark cloud of ignorance be
removed from the human mind, and man be made to feel the im-
portance of a good character, reputation, and the good he owes
to himself, to all around, and to the great Author of his exist-
ence, and that virtue and happiness are most likely to be the
legitimate attendants of that knowledge that orders and influences
aright the practices and actions of men. And, sir, it is, from awak-
ening this inclination for the diffusion of useful knowledge of every
sort among the body of mankind, that we derive one of our strong-
est grounds of hope for human nature, and for the world; and it
is for this reason that we should hail with delight the establishment
of this general system of common school education, upon a solid
and firm foundation; and it is, sir, with the same hope and interest,
that we should now look for the dissemination of such principles
as will contribute to our happiness, and the happiness of those
who may come on the stage of life after us. But what earthly
glory, sir, is there of equal lustre and duration to that conferred
by education? What else could have bestowed such renown upon
the philosophers, the poets, the statesmen, and the orators of
antiquity? What else, sir, could have conferred such undisputed
applause upon Aristotle, Demosthenes and Homer; on Virgil,
Horace and Cicero? And is learning less interesting, sir, now
than it was in centuries past, when those statesmen and orators
charmed and ruled empires with their eloquence? Sir, let it not
922

FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1847 923

be thought that those great men acquired a greater fame than is
within the reach of the present age. Many sons of this country,
sir, possess as high native talents as any other nation of ancient
or modern times! Many of the poorest of our children possess
bright intellectual genius, if they were as highly polished, as did
the proudest scholars of Greece and Rome. But too long — too
disgracefully long, has coward, trembling, procrastinating indif-
ference upon this subject, permitted them to lie buried in dark
unfathomed caves. Sir, it was a ray of the light of education that
first actuated our forefathers to leave the land of their nativity
and seek an asylum from oppression in this, then wilderness land.
And it was the still farther illumination of the human mind, by a
proper direction and cultivation of its faculties, that we, as a nation
have prospered, and only can prosper. Thus, we see that in pro-
portion, as the light of knowledge has dawned on the human mind,
have correct principles been inculcated, and the happiness of the
human family increased. To see the result in our state, we have
only to glance at its condition. We behold ourselves as a state,
though yet in our [in]fancy, in a prosperous condition; teeming with
the fruits of a bountiful Providence, and with numerous institu-
tions of learning, founded by the liberality and wisdom of an
enlightened people. Whose prosperity, at home and abroad,
is founded on the useful knowledge that is disseminated in every
class in the community.

Messrs. Mason and Hurlbut both advocated the appoint-
ment of the state superintendent.

Mr. CALDWELL and Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon present-
ed propositions in relation to the state debt, which were laid on [the]
table, and ordered to be printed.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess said, that he was exceedingly
anxious to have a direct vote upon the question, whether they
would have a superintendent or not and did not like to see
it choked down with any such ridiculous amendment as that
the Legislature may do what everyone knew they had the power
to do without any provision on the subject. He liked no such
evasive proposition, it was nothing more than holding out to the
people a sort of pretended desire on the part of the Convention
to give them what they looked for so anxiously. Why tell the

924 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Legislature that they "may" do this? Do not the gentlemen
know that they have the power to create this office without this
provision, and why then burden the constitution with a recital
of what the Legislature may do? If we do so in one instance why
not in all, and where then will we stop? — When will this Conven-
tion adjourn if we go on and insert in the constitution everything
that the Legislature may do, when we know they can do it as well
without as with such provision. The object, however, was clear;
they propose this "may" proposition in order to deceive the peo-
ple, and to avoid the responsibility of voting directly on a question,
which if they rejected, they knew the people would hold them
responsible for. He was of opinion, anyway, that they would be
held responsible if this question was defeated, no matter how they
managed to avoid and shrink from it. He hoped the amendment
would be withdrawn and the single isolated question of a state
superintendent or not, would be voted upon, and either adopted or
rejected.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved to lay the amendment of Mr.
Davis on the table; whereupon

Mr. DAVIS said, he would withdraw his amendment, and
moved the previous question.

Mr. LOGAN appealed to him to withdraw it, and it was with-
drawn.

Mr. LOGAN then renewed the amendment just withdrawn by
Mr. Davis.

Mr. PRATT moved to lay the amendment on the table.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Jo Daviess modified his substitute so as
that the superintendent should be appointed by the Governor and
two-thirds of the Senate.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on laying the amend-
ment of Mr. Logan on the table, and the motion was lost — yeas
64, nays 79.

Mr. ATHERTON moved the previous question; ordered.

And the question being taken on the amendment of Mr.
Logan, to the substitute of Mr. Campbell, it was adopted — yeas
82, nays 63.

The question then recurred on inserting the substitute as
amended in lieu of the 4th and 5th sections of the report.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1847 925

Mr. PRATT asked for a division of the question so as to vote
first on striking out those sections; and the division was refused.

Mr. CAMPBELL said, that he hoped now the whole subject
would be laid on the table; there was no use in swelling the con-
stitution with a useless recital of powers in the Legislature, that
no one doubted, but they had at present.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on striking out
4th and 5th sections and inserting the amended substitute, and it
was decided in the affirmative — yeas 82, nays 62.

Mr. ARMSTRONG moved that the report be now taken up,
section by section; adopted.

Mr. LOGAN offered as an additional section to follow section
one, the following:

"All money hereafter received from the government of the
United States, on account, or for the benefit of, the school, college
and seminary fund, or either of them, be appropriated to the
payment of the bonds of this state held by the government of
the United States in trust for the Smithsonian Institute until said
bonds are discharged: and the amount so paid shall be added to
the school fund, and interest thereon shall be promptly paid.' '

Mr. DEITZ offered the following substitute therefor:

"All moneys hereafter received from the government of the
United States, on account or for the benefit of the school, college
and seminary fund, or either of them, shall be invested in the
outstanding bonds of this state at their market value, so long as
any bonds are outstanding, and it shall be the duty of the General
Assembly to make provision for the punctual payment of the
interest on the bonds so purchased.' '

Mr. MOFFETT moved the previous question; ordered.

Mr. DEMENT moved a call of the Convention; — refused.

The question was taken on the substitute, and it was adopted.
Yeas 75, nays 70.

The amendment, as amended, was then adopted — yeas 72, nays
69.

Mr. SCATES moved to add to the end of the second line of
the first section: "and also the moneys arising from the sale of
the sixteenth section."

926 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. TURNBULL moved to lay the amendment on the table.
Carried.

Mr. DAVIS of Montgomery moved to amend by adding the
following additional section:

"The interest due to the several counties of this state, from
the school, college and seminary fund, shall be paid annually, to
the proper officers of said counties, in gold and silver."

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to reconsider the vote, by which
the report was taken up by sections; and the motion, by yeas and
nays, was carried — yeas 72, nays 59.

The whole report being then before the Convention,

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to lay the whole subject on the
table. Carried — yeas 73, nays 58.

Mr. SCATES said, that one of the members of the select com-
mittee on preparing a schedule, had gone home and would not
return. He therefore moved that the President fill the vacancy
on that committee, occasioned by the absence of Mr. Manly,
from the 4th circuit.

Mr. SMITH of Macon moved the Convention adjourn. Re-
jected.

Mr. SCATES said, the committee would have a meeting at
2 o'clock, and the vacancy ought to be filled now.

Considerable time was consumed and much confusion pre-
vailed, during which, motions to adjourn were continually made
by Messrs. Thomas, Smith, Woodson, Dawson, Kenner and
Knowlton; which were rejected.

Mr. HAYES contended that the chair had the power, without
any motion, to fill the vacancy; but he hoped the motion would
be persisted in, to see how long the whigs would struggle to prevent
the vacancy being filled.

Messrs. Thornton, Knowlton and Woodson opposed the
motion, and argued that there was no evidence that Mr. Manly
was absent.

Messrs. Z. Casey, Archer, and others informed the house that
Mr. M. had gone home.

After various motions to adjourn had been voted down,

Mr. LOGAN said that he hoped the opposition would be with-
drawn.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1847 927

The motion was put, and no quorum voted, (one side of the
house refusing to vote). The motions to adjourn were renewed,
and again rejected.

And finally, the motion of Mr. Scates prevailed, and Mr.
Hayes was appointed to fill the vacancy.

And then the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. EDWARDS, from the committee on Revision, to whom
had been referred the subject, made the following report:

Sec. — . Whenever two-thirds of all the members elected to
each branch of the General Assembly shall think it necessary
to alter or amend this constitution, they shall recommend to the
electors at the next election of members to the General Assembly,
to vote for or against a convention; and if it shall appear that a
majority of all the electors of the state voting for Representatives,
have voted for a convention, the General Assembly shall, at the
next session, call a convention, to consist of as many members as
the House of Representatives, at the time of making said call, to
be chosen in the same manner, at the same place, and by the same
electors, in the same districts that choose the said General Assem-
bly, and which convention shall meet within three months after
the said election, for the purpose of revising, altering or amending
this constitution.

Mr. KENNER offered the following substitute therefor:

Sec. — . Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution,
may be proposed in either branch of the General Assembly, and
if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members
elect in each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or
amendments shall be referred to the next regular session of the
General Assembly, and shall be published at least three months
previous to the time of holding the next election for members of
the House of Representatives, and if (at the next regular session
of the General Assembly after the said election) a majority of all
the members elect in each branch of the General Assembly shall
agree to said amendment or amendments, then it shall be their
duty to submit the same to the people at the next general election,
for their adoption or rejection, in such mannel- as may be pre-

928 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

scribed by law, and if a majority of the electors voting at such
election for members of the House of Representatives, shall vote
for such amendment or amendments, the same shall become a part
of the constitution. But the General Assembly shall not have
the power to propose an amendment or amendments to more than
one article of the constitution at the same session.

There followed another section, but Mr. K. withdrew it, and
moved to add the foregoing to the report of the committee.

Mr. McCALLEN moved to lay it on the table.

The amendment was then adopted.

The report, as amended, was adopted and referred to the
committee on Revision.

Mr. WOODSON moved to take up the report of the com-
mittee on Finance. Adopted.

The question pending was on the substitute offered by Mr.
Edwards of Madison.

Mr. CALDWELL offered the following, as a substitute for
the substitute:

ARTICLE —

Section i. There shall be levied upon all the taxable property
of the state, a tax of three mills upon every dollar's worth of such
property; which, as collected, shall be faithfully applied to the
payment of the internal improvement debt of this state.

Sec. 2. The collectors of the several counties of this state, in
making collections of the tax provided for in the last section, shall
receive in payment of said tax the indebtedness of this state in-
curred on account of the internal improvement system, or specie
in payment of said tax, on an assessment of two mills upon every
dollar's worth of all taxable property in this state.

Sec. 3. The General Assembly shall, by law, make such pro-
vision as will enable the holders of such indebtedness to deposit
the same with the Auditor of Public Accounts, and receive in lieu
thereof certificates in suitable sums, which shall be received in
payment of the tax provided for in the first section.

And the question being taken thereon, it was rejected.

Mr. EDWARDS of Sangamon offered the following as a sub-
sritute for the one pending:

FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1847 929

Sec. — . It shall be the duty of the Legislature to ascertain
upon what terms a satisfactory arrangement can be made with
our creditors for the payment of the state debt, and if any agree-
ment can be entered into, that meets with the approbation of the
General Assembly, the law containing the terms of such compro-
mise shall be submitted to thepeople, and if approved by a majority
voting for and against the same, shall be irrepealable; and it shall
be the duty of the General Assembly to pass all laws necessary
to enforce its provisions and continue the same in force, until the
stipulations on the part of the state shall have been complied
with.

Messrs. Logan and Hayes opposed the last, and advocated
the proposition of Mr. Edwards of Madison.

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison withdrew the 2d and 3d sections
of his substitute.

Mr. LOGAN moved to lay the substitute of his colleague on
the table. Yeas 92, nays 2^-

Mr. AKIN moved to lay the whole subject on the table.
Lost.

Mr. CALDWELL offered the following as a substitute for the
one now pending; and it was rejected.

Sec. I. There shall be levied upon all the taxable property
in this state, an alternate tax of two mills, in state indebted-
ness, and of one mill in specie, on every dollar's worth of such
property; which, as collected, shall be faithfully applied to the
payment of the internal improvement debt of this state.

Sec. 2. The collectors of the several counties of this state in
making collections of the two mill tax provided for in the last
section, shall receive on payment of said tax the indebtedness of
this state, incurred on account of the Internal Improvement
system, or specie in payment of said one mill tax, and the payment
of either of said assessments shall be a discharge from the other.
Sec. 3. The General Assembly shall by law make such pro-
vision as will enable the holders of such indebtedness to deposit
the same with the Auditor of Public Accounts, and receive in lieu
thereof certificates in suitable sums, which shall be receivable in
payment of the two mill tax above provided for; provided, that
the foregoing sections shall be submitted as a separate article to

93°

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

the people for the acceptance or rejection of a majority of them,
voting for and against the same.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the previous question, which was
ordered.

Mr. BALLINGALL moved to reconsider the vote ordering
the previous question. Carried.

And then the Convention adjourned till to-morrow, at 8 a. m.

LXVII. SATURDAY, AUGUST 28, 1847

Mr. EDWARDS of Madison, for the committee on Revision
and Adjustment of Articles, &c., reported back to the Convention
the several articles adopted by the Convention with numerous
verbal amendments.

The same was read, section after section, which occupied two
hours and more, and the amendments were concurred in.

The Convention then resumed the consideration of the report
of the committee on Finance, and the pending substitute therefor.

Mr. WHITESIDE offered an amendment, a copy of which
we did not get, but its purport was, that the collectors of the tax
proposed might receive in payment thereof the stocks and other
indebtedness of the state.

Mr. CONSTABLE opposed the amendment. The Auditor of
this state, in the discharge of his duty at the seat of government,
with all the means and facilities of discovering the genui[ne]ness
of the bonds, had received over ^40,000 in forged bonds. If
this occurred here, how much more of these forgeries would be
received by these collectors, who had not the means of testing their
genui[ne]ness; it would be but giving those who had those forged
bonds an opportunity of putting them upon the state. None but
forged papers would be received, for the persons holding the
genuine ones were not indebted to the state.

Mr. DEMENT opposed the amendment of Mr. Whiteside,
for additional reasons, than had been urged by others. He did
not believe, that in practice, the proposition could be carried out
in a way that would be beneficial to the mass of tax payers.
None but large tax payers would find any advantage from
the proposition; while large landholders could apply the stocks
and evidences of our state indebtedness in payment of their taxes,
so as to reduce the rate of taxation from 50 to 70 per cent.; the
mass of the tax payers could not avail themselves of it at all.
Therefore its operation upon the tax payers would be partial,
and discriminate in favor of the large property holders. While
931

932

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

on the floor he would avail himself of the occasion to urge a few
objections to the main proposition, which urged themselves with
great force upon his mind, and which would, perhaps, influence
him to vote against it, and would also apply to many other sub-
jects that had been brought before the Convention, and were
proposed to become parts of the new constitution. This is, that
he thought this proposition to levy an additional tax of two mills
upon each dollar's worth of property, should not form any part of
the permanent organic law of the state. It was a mere question
of policy, applying to a peculiar condition of our state, over which
circumstances, variable and changeable, have great influence,
and a policy which would seem very proper to-day within a short
period might become very unwise and inconvenient. He did not
doubt the willingness of the people to submit to the imposition
of any just and reasonable rate of taxation for the purpose of pay-
ing the obligations and indebtedness of the state, and would, from
year to year, support the levying of such a rate of taxation as
would be satisfactory to our creditors, and calculated to sustain
the credit of the state in the estimation of the good and just of
every section. He did not feel sure, however, that a proposition
to fix irrevocably in the constitution an article imposing an addi-
tional tax of twenty cents on each one hundred dollars' worth of
property, when encumbered by such objectionable features and
principles as the proposition of the gentleman from Madison
(Mr. Edwards) contained, would meet with the approbation and
support of the people; and while the people are as fully resolved
upon paying the state debt by taxation as men could be upon any
subject, they might, in his opinion, very justly vote down this
proposition on account of the arbitrary and unjust mode upon
which we here seem to determine upon making this payment. He
meant the application of the money in the payment of the princi-
pal only of the debt, leaving our first and solemn obligation, to
pay the interest on the debt, unprovided for in the constitution.
The proposition contains a speculation determined on, if adopted,
by the Convention, without consulting our creditors. This prop-
osition requires this large sum of money to be kept separately
to be applied to the payment and extinguishment of the principal
(oriu,lnal only) of the debt. It may be said that our creditors need

SATURDAY, AUGUST 28, 1847 933

not take it unless they are willing. — This was true, and they will
not take it, (at least many, in his opinion, will not) and then what
is to be done with this large sum of money, which must, of neces-
sity, accumulate and lie useless in our state treasury, while the
interest on the debt remains unpaid.

Mr. BOND followed in a speech in favor of the substitute, and
explained that his course in advocacy of a poll tax had been
dictated by a desire on his part, and the part of his constituents,
to raise a revenue to pay off the debt.

Mr. GREGG said that he did not propose to enter into a dis-
cussion of the subject under consideration. — The proper period
for discussion had gone by. The session of the Convention was
too near its close to permit such full and free consideration on the
proposition that had been offered as was desirable. He regretted
that this was the case — he regretted that the subject had not been
brought forward at an earlier period, so as to enable members to
give full expression to their views and feelings. Had this been
done he thought the action of the Convention would have
been wiser than it was now likely to be. He would have been glad to
discuss this subject fully, and enter at large into an exposition of
what he thought to be the proper financial policy of the state; but
now he proposed to confine himself to a brief statement of the
course he intended to pursue. Gentlemen had undoubtedly made
up their minds as to their votes, and he did not intend to occupy
their attention when they were so anxious for a settlement of the
question. He was not prepared to give his support to the amend-
ment offered by the gentleman from Monroe. The reason[s] which
had been assigned by others as the ground of their opposition
were satisfactory to him. He did not think it wise or expedient
to permit any tax that may be imposed to be collected in scrip, or
other evidences of indebtedness. It has been well said that frauds
might be committed, which no precaution would be able to pre-
vent. Besides, might we not be treating the public creditors with
injustice? — Nor did the proposition of the gentleman from Madi-
son altogether suit his views. It proposes to apply the avails of
the two mill tax towards the extinguishment of the principal of
the debt. He would prefer a provision more in accordance with
our obligations to the public creditors. We have contracted to

934 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

pay them interest, and he thought the interest should be dis
charged before we attempt to extinguish the principal. The time
of paying off the whole will not be much prolonged if that course
is taken. According to the calculations of the gentleman from
Madison, a period of only twenty-five years will be required to
liquidate, in the manner proposed by his substitute, all that por-
tion of the debt incurred for internal improvement purposes. He
did not doubt the accuracy of his calculations. If an error has
been committed it consists in estimating the annual increase of
our taxable property at too low a rate. He thought the increase
considerably beyond seven per cent. From 1842 up to the present
time it has been over twelve per cent. Many gentlemen seem to
think that we may reasonably calculate an annual increase of ten
per cent, during the next twenty-five years. If they are correct,
there will be no difficulty in discharging, in that time, first the
interest now due, and then the accruing interest and principal.
But however objectionable may be the proposition of the gentle-
man from Madison, he was satisfied that it cannot be amended in
the manner he had just suggested. There is an evident disposi-
tion on the part of members of the Convention to go for it as it
stands. The report of the Finance committee has not the slightest
chance of favorable consideration. Under these circumstances he
was inclined to go for the proposition of the gentleman from
Madison as the best measure likely to be of any effect in providing
for the payment of the public debt. He did not sustain it as his
first choice, but because he was convinced that nothing better can
be obtained. The proposition to submit the question of a two
mill tax separately to the people for their approval did not meet
his views of propriety. It implied a doubt of the popular willing-
ness to make provision for the payment of the public debt. What-
ever provision may be adopted should be placed in the body of
the constitution, and take the same fate as that instrument. The
people of this state have a proper sense of what is due to them-
selves and the public creditors. There is no spirit of repudiation
at work in any part of this state. From every quarter we hear
the same honorable sentiments expressed. All are desirous of
discharging our obligations in good faith and justice. There is a
general expectation that this Convention will make some ade-

SATURDAY, AUGUST 28, 1847 935

quate constitutional provision on the subject. If we fail to do
this, we shall not do what is plainly required of us. Mr. G. con-
cluded by saying, that although a more full consideration of the
subject was proper, he would not, under the circumstances,
trouble the Convention further, and he trusted that the decision
about to be made would lead to all the favorable results which
gentlemen predicted.

Mr. DAVIS of Massac said, that he deemed it due to himself
and the people he had the honor to represent to express his views
on the question now before the Convention. There was no sub-
ject in which he took a livelier interest than that then under
consideration; there was none indeed in which the people of the
state feel so deeply as that of the state debt. This debt, sir,
was contracted by the representatives of the people at a time
when all men seemed to be mad on the subject of internal
improvement. But, sir, it is wholly immaterial how or under
what circumstances the debt was contracted. It is enough for
an honest man to know that we are in debt, and that the sacred
faith of the state is pledged for the payment of that debt. Upon
the adoption of some provision for the speedy liquidation and
payment of our public debt depends the priceless honor of the
state. Shall we, the representatives of the freemen of Illinois,
prove recreant to the solemn duty which we owe to ourselves and
to posterity? — Shall we forget, sir, that the eyes of the world are
upon us, and that if we act wisely we will be hailed as public bene-
factors. But that if we shrink meanly from the performance of a
solemn duty we will be branded as cowards and traitors to the
best interests of our countrymen.

We are in debt, sir. I repeat we are in debt, and should pro-
vide for its payment! The question then arises in what way shall
we do this? We know of but one plain and practical way, and
that was by taxation. You may talk, sir, about funding the
d'^bt, but when you attempt to do that you will find that you
cannot fund without money, and to raise money you are com-
pelled to resort to taxation. If you would pay the debt then you
must tax the people, or at least you must allow them to tax them-
selves. The people, sir, are honest, they desire to see some pro-
vision made for the payment of what they owe, and are willing to

936 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

submit to reasonable taxation to accomplish that end. Let them
once know, that they must tax themselves or suffer the debt to
accumulate until it shall either deter them from the effort to pay,
or require heavier taxes to meet it, and they will tell you that
procrastination is unstatesman-like and ruinous. They will say
to you, sir, that you should have made your best endeavors to get
rid of this great evil of a public debt, at the earliest possible day.
The proposition on the table, was to his mind unexceptionable.
What is it, sir? It is a proposition, to be submitted to the people,
for their approval or rejection. Rejection, did I say? No, sir;
not for their rejection, for the people never can reject, they never
will reject such a proposition. Their good sense teaches them
that they must tax themselves to pay the debt of the state, or
repudiate it; and knowing this, they will cheerfully submit to
taxation, that the honor of the state may be preserved, untarnished
by the stain of repudiation. What, sir, is the amount pro-
posed to be levied ? Two mills on the dollar's worth of property. —
This sir, is a trifling tax when compared with the magnitude of the
object to be secured by its payment, the prevention of the growth
of the present amount of debt, and the maintenance of the honor
and faith of the state. And how is this tax of twenty cents on the
hundred dollars' worth of property to be imposed? By the volun-
tary consent of the people. It is not to be an arbitrary tax, ex-
acted from the people without or against their consent, but sir, it is
to be a free offering of the people madeonthealtarof their country's
honor. — What, sir, are the present condition and future prospects
of this state. Now, only twenty-nine years old, she owes about
eleven millions of dollars, (canal and internal improvement debt,
taken together) the former of which is said to be provided for,
the latter being six millions of dollars only. What is this, sir, for
a state such as Illinois is destined under Providence soon to be?
She, sir, comprises within her constitutional limits, fifty-odd
thousand square miles, of the most fertile and productive land on
the habitable globe. Her population is rapidly increasing in num-
ber and resources. She numbered at the taking of the last census
more than seven hundred thousand souls — the increase being
almost a hundred per cent in the short period of five years. And
what, sir, is the amount of her taxable property? — one hundred

SATURDAY, AUGUST 28, 1847 937

millions, while yet in her infancy. Is there a delegate from any
county in the state on this floor who will hesitate to give his vote
in favor of the proposition? There may be some such, but why
so? — Are they afraid to submit this proposition to the people?
Certainly there are none such here. All acknowledge that the
debt ought to be paid, and that there is but one way to pay it
Why then hesitate? Do gentlemen suppose it would be wiser to
leave this subject to future Legislatures, than to submit it to the
people? If they do, let me remind them that Legislatures are not
always willing to assume the responsibility of taxing their constit-
uents, and that they are sometimes behind the people in matters
of this kind. The representatives of a free people should be
cautious how they tax them and for what purpose, and so they
ever are. — Again, sir, should this subject be left where it is, with
the Legislature — the representatives of the people might not
know, and indeed it would be difficult for them to know the real
sentiments of the people in relation to it. But, sir, let the subject
be submitted to a vote of the people, and all doubts would be
removed; they are the source of all political power, and their voice
will be heard and obeyed. Are there any here who will vote
against this proposition because they fear that the people may
possibly refuse by their votes to adopt it? If there are any such
he would say to them discard your fears, trust the people in this
momentous affair, they will decide it right. But suppose they
should vote against the two mill tax, would our condition be worse
then than now? Not at all, sir. We do not pay now — we would
not pay then. But what reason have we to fear that the people
would reject this proposition? Are the apprehensions of gentle-
men on this score not contradicted by the experience of the last
three or four years? What, sir, was the voice of the people in
relation to the tax imposed with a view to the completion of
the canal? It was the voice of approval. The proceedings of the
meetings of the people of several of the southern counties furnish
evidence of the sentiments of the people of that quarter on this
subject. But, sir, the gentleman from Lee, though individually
in favor of the proposition of the gentleman from Madison, if he
understood him aright, thinks it possible, that demagogues may
tell the people that it is wrong, and induce them to go against it.

938 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

What, sir, are demagogues to give tone to the public opinion in
this state? Where, sir, will be the patriotic sons of Illinois then?
Will there not be enough left to silence the tongue of demagogism?
Yes, sir, and they will silence it.

Again, the gentleman from Lee says that the people may
desire to have the tax repealed, but if you insert it in the consti-
tution, it will be irrepealable; and although it may operate oppres-
sively, the people cannot get rid of it. The tax proposed to be
submitted for the adoption of the people, is only two mills on the
dollar. Is it probable, nay, is it possible, that such a tax
could ever become oppressive? I think not, sir. I hope not. In
conclusion, sir, said Mr. D., I hope that the amendment of the
honorable gentleman from Monroe will be rejected. It is wrong —
I cannot support it. Should it be adopted, the wealthier tax
payers would be benefited, they might pay their taxes in state
indebtedness; poor men could not command state bonds, and would
therefore be compelled to pay their taxes in gold and silver or their
equivalents. I hope, sir, that the proposition of the gentleman
from Madison will be sustained by the Convention.

Mr. WHITESIDE withdrew his amendment.

Messrs. Logan and Edwards continued the discussion.

Mr. HURLBUT moved the previous question.

Mr. PRATT desired to express his views, and hoped the call
for the previous question would be withdrawn; which was re-
fused.

The yeas and nays were taken on ordering the previous ques-
tion; and it was ordered — yeas 65, nays 53.

Mr. HOGUE moved the Convention adjourn. Lost.

Mr. DEMENT moved a call of the Convention. Refused.

Mr. ARCHER asked a division of the question, so as to vote
first on striking out the Finance committee's report. Refused.

The question was then taken on substituting the plan of Mr.
Edwards of Madison for the report of the committee; and decided
in the affirmative — yeas 96, nays 27.

Mr. PRATT said, he was a member of the Finance committee
and preferred the report to the substitute just inserted. But as
he did not desire to have his vote recorded against a proposition

SATURDAY, AUGUST 28, 1847 939

to pay the state debt, as no other could be presented, he would
vote for it.

Mr. BROCKMAN said he, too, was a member of the com-
mittee, and for the same reasons expressed by the gentleman from
Jo Daviess, he would vote for the substitute.

The question recurred on the adoption of the substitute, as an
article of the Constitution; and resulted — yeas 97, nays 23.

The article was then referred to the committee on Revision.

And the Convention adjourned till 3 p. m.

AFTERNOON

Mr. THOMAS moved to reconsider the vote by which a
resolution ordering 50,000 copies of the constitution to be printed
was passed.

He then moved that the number be changed to 150 copies for
each member; which was changed to 200 copies for each member;
and was then passed.

Mr. KITCHELL offered the following, which was adopted:

Resolved, That the number of copies of the new constitution,
ordered to be printed in the German and Norwegian languages,
when printed, be distributed equally among the German and
Norwegian population of the state; and that the several members
of this Convention report to the respective committees appointed
to procure the printing of the constitution in said languages, the
number of such German or Norwegian population in their respec-
tive counties.

The reports of the committee on Internal Improvements,
Agriculture, &c., was taken up, the first section adopted, and after
the rejection of various amendments upon different subjects, the
remainder was laid on the table.

Mr. SCATES, from the select committee on the schedule, re-
ported several sections, to compose that schedule.

Mr. THORNTON, from the minority of the same committee,
also made a report.

Mr. PETERS moved they be laid on the table, and printed.
Rejected.

The majority report was taken up by sections, and down to
the eleventh section was adopted.

940 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. THORNTON moved to strike out the eleventh section,
(proposing a division of the constitution into several parts, to be
voted on separately by the people) and to insert the minority
report. After a short debate, the motion was carried — yeas 86,
nays 6i.

Mr. WOODSON proposed a substitute for the twelfth section;
which was adopted.

The thirteenth section was read.

Mr. DEMENT moved that the Convention adjourn. — Lost.

Section thirteen was laid on the table.

Mr. BOSBYSHELL moved the Convention adjourn. Lost.

Section fourteen (proposing that the first election for state
officers shall be held in August, instead of November, 1848,) was
read.

Various motions to adjourn, for a call of the Convention, &c.,
were made, and lost.

Mr. LOGAN moved to strike out August, and insert Novem-
ver, 1848.

Pending which motion, and after the utmost confusion for an
hour, nearly one hundred members on the floor at a time, all kinds
of missiles (harmless) flying from one end of the house to the other,
everybody speaking, nobody listening, the President totally
unable to be heard in his demands for order, the question to
adjourn was again put, and as all the members were on their feet,
at the time of the division, the "ayes" had it.

LXVIII. MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1847

The question pending at the adjournment on Saturday was on
the motion of Mr. Logan, to strike out "August" and insert
"November."

Mr. HAYES moved the previous question.

Mr. LOGAN moved a call of the Convention. — Refused.

The previous question then was ordered.

A division of the question was asked, and refused.

The yeas and nays were ordered on the motion of Mr. Logan,
and resulted — yeas 66, nays 77.

The section was then adopted — yeas 79, nays 65.

Section 15 was struck out, and section 16 adopted.

Mr. PRATT offered an additional section; which was laid on
the table.

Mr. J. M. DAVIS offered an additional section, providing that
all elections should be held in August; which was rejected — yeas
35, nays 95.

Mr. SCATES offered an additional section; to which

Mr. LOGAN moved to add, that the judges should be elected
in November, 1848.

Mr. HAYES moved to insert ' 'September;' ' which was accept-
ed, and then the section passed.

The schedule was then referred to the committee on Revision.

Mr. CONSTABLE, from the select committee to prepare an
address to the people, made a report; which was read.

Mr. DEMENT excepted to a remark in it in relation to the
provision in relation to the two mill tax, and was replied to by
Messrs. Constable, Edwards and Logan.

Mr. ARCHER moved the previous question; which was
ordered, and the address was adopted — yeas 113, nays 29.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved the address be referred to the com-
mittee on Revision.

Mr. LOGAN moved that the address be added to the constitu-
tion, and that it be printed therewith.
941

942 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Mr. BROCKMAN said that the motion was unnecessary; the
resolution to raise the committee on the address required the
address to accompany the constitution.

Mr. ARCHER moved that the address be referred to the com-
mittee on Revision, and that it be printed with the constitution
excepting in the 250 ordered to be printed for the use of the Con-
vention.

And the motion was carried — yeas 94, nays 29.

Mr. LOCKWOOD offered a resolution that the committee on
Revision be instructed to correct and supply all clerical errors
and omissions in the constitution. Carried.

Mr. LOGAN moved that two copies of the journal be allowed
each member of the Convention, and that 200 copies be deposited
in the office of the Secretary of State. Carried.

Mr. KNAPP reported back various papers that had been
referred to the committee on the Bill of Rights.

Mr. HURLBUT moved the Convention adjourn till 5 p. m.
Carried.

AFTERNOON

Mr. THOMAS moved that the Convention adjourn till to-
morrow morning. He said that the enrolling clerks were at work,
that the committee on Revision had not yet completed their
work, and that it was impossible to have the constitution ready
to sign till morning.

Mr. ARCHER hoped the Convention would adjourn to 7 p. m.
Many members had made arrangements to go home to-morrow
morning.

Both motions were withdrawn, and

Mr. ECCLES offered a resolution that James T. Ewing, 2d
assistant secretary, be allowed the same compensation paid
to the assistant secretary.

Mr. NORTHCOTT moved to lay it on the table. Refused.

The question was taken by yeas and nays on the adoption of
the resolution, and it was passed — yeas 85, nays 32.

Mr. DEMENT offered a resolution that the President of the
Convention deliver the constitution, when signed by the members,
to the Secretary of State in open Convention, to be by him de-

MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1847 943

posited in the archives of the department of state; and the same
was adopted.

Mr. EDMONSON (Mr. Harvey in the chair) offered the
following resolution; which was unanimously adopted.

Resolved, That the thanks of this Convention be tendered to
the President, Hon. Newton Cloud, for the dignified, impartial
and courteous manner in which he has presided over its deliber-
ations.

Mr. GREGG offered the following; which was unanimously
adopted:

Resolved, That Henry W. Moore and Harmon G. Reynolds
are entitled to the thanks of this Convention for the prompt and
efficient manner in which they have discharged their duties as
secretaries.

And then the Convention adjourned till to-morrow morning
at 8 A. M.

LXIX. TUESDAY, AUGUST 31, 1847

The committee on Revision reported back to the Convention,
the schedule and address, with various verbal amendments; which
were read, and adopted.

They also reported an enrolled copy of the constitution and
schedule; which were read over, and some amendments, erasures,
and interlineations were made.

The constitution was then adopted, by yeas and nays, as
follows :

Yeas — Adams, Armstrong, Atherton, Blakely, Bond, Bosby-
shell, Brockman, Brown, Campbell of McDonough, Campbell of
Jo Daviess, Zadoc Casey, Choate, Church, Churchill, Constable,
Crain, Cross of Winnebago, Cross of Woodford, Dale, Davis of
McLean, Davis of Montgomery, Dawson, Dei tz. Dement, Dummer,
Dunn, Dunsmore, Eccles, Edmonson, Edwards of Madison,
Edwards of Sangamon, Evey, Farwell, Frick, Graham, Geddes,
Green of Clay, Green of Tazewell, Grimshaw, Harding, Harlan,
Harper, Hatch, Hawley, Hay, Hayes, Henderson, Hill, Hoes,
Hogue, Hunsaker, Hurlbut, Huston, Jackson, James, Jenkins,
Jones, Judd, Kenner, Kinney of Bureau, Kitchell, Knapp of Jersey,
Knapp of Scott, Knowlton, Knox, Kreider, Lasater, Laughlin,
Lemon, Lenley, Lockwood, Logan, Loudon, McCallen, McCuUy,
McClure, McHatton, Markley, Marshall of Coles, Marshall of
Mason, Mason, Matheny, Mieure, Miller, Minshall, Moore,
Morris, Northcott, Norton, Oliver, Pace, Palmer of Macoupin,
Palmer of Stark, Peters, Pinckney, Pratt, Rives, Robbins, Robin-
son, Roman, Rountree, Scates, Servant, Shields, Shumway, Sib-
ley, Sim, Simpson, Smith of Macon, Spencer, Stadden, Swan,
Thomas, Thompson, Thornton, Trower, Turnbull, Turner, Tutt,
Tuttle, Vernor, Wead, Webber, West, Williams, Witt, Whiteside,
Whitney, Woodson, Worcester, Mr. President, — 131.

Nays — Akin, Ballingall, Bunsen, Colby, Gregg, Kinney of
St. Clair, Smith of Gallatin— 7.

Absent — Allen, Anderson, Archer, Blair, Butler, Caldwell,
944

TUESDAY, AUGUST 31, 1S47 945

Canady, Carter, F. S. Casey, Davis of Massac, Dunlap, Green of
Jo Daviess, Harvey, Heacock, Holmes, Lander, Manly, MofFett,
Nichols, Powers, Sharpe, Sherman, Singleton, Vance.

Mr. SCATES moved that the various interlineations and
erasures be noted at the end of the constitution before it shall be
signed; which motion was concurred in.

He also moved, that as soon as the same was done, that the
constitution be signed by the President, and then by the members
in alphabetical order, and the whole to be attested by the Sec-
retaries. Adopted.

Mr. ECCLES moved that members having authority from
absent delegates to sign for them, be allowed to do so. Carried.

Mr. GREGG moved that members not present be allowed
to sign the constitution, at any time before the first Monday in
March next, the Secretary of State to attest their signatures.
Carried.

Mr. WOODSON moved that Mr. N. VV. Edwards and the
Secretary of State be directed to compare the printed copy with
the enrolled one, and that when correct they certify to the same.

Mr. CONSTABLE moved to add to the committee Mr.
Brayman, esq. Agreed to, and the motion [was] adopted.

The erasures and interlineations were then noted by the clerks
at the foot of the constitution, and at half-past twelve o'clock the
President signed the instrument. The members then in alpha-
betical order signed the constitution, many of the names of the
absentees being written by their authority by members present.

The same being concluded, the President delivered the con-
stitution into the hands of the Hon. Horace S. Cooley, Secretary
of State, to be by him preserved in the archives of his office.

No other business being before the Convention,

The PRESIDENT rose, and in a few brief, but feeling remarks,
congratulated the Convention upon the happy result of their labors,
and wishing them a safe return to their families, health and pros-
perity, he bid them an affectionate farewell, and pronounced the
Constitutional Convention of the State of Illinois to be adjourned
sine die.

APPENDIX

Biographical Sketches of Officers and Members of the
Constitutional Convention

Adams, Augustus: born May lo, 1806, in Genoa, Cayuga County, New York;
1817, thrown on his own resources by his father's death; spent summers on farm,
devoted spare time to study, and taught school during four winters; 1829-1837,
conducted foundry and machine shop at Pine Valley, New York; 1838, came to
Elgin, Illinois; returned to New York in spring of 1839, and in 1840 removed with
family to Elgin; 1841, established at Elgin the first foundry and machine shop west
of Chicago; manufactured first harvester on which grain was both bound and
carried; in collaboration with Philo Sylla invented the hinge sickle bar now used
on all mowing machines; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1850-1852,
representative in General Assembly; 1 854-1 858, state senator; 1856 (1857), closed
business at Elgin and established himself at Sandwich, DeKalb County, in the
manufacture of Adams' Corn Sheller; 1867, organized and became president of
Sandwich Manufacturing Company; 1869, appointed by Governor Palmer as one
of the commissioners to locate Northern Hospital for the Insane; 1870, organized
and became president of Marseilles Manufacturing Company; in poHtics a Whig,
thereafter a Republican; died 1892. United Slates Biographical Dictionary, l\]\no\s
Volume, 353-354; B/ue Book 0/ lUinois, igiyigi4,pp. 362-364; Past and Present of
Kane County, 392; Gross, Past and Present of DeKalb County, 2:217-218; Portrait
and Biographical Album of DeKalb County, 473-474; HoUingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Akin, George W. (John W.): born 1814, in Tennessee; 1818, brought to Illi-
nois; farmer near Benton, Franklin County; 1842-1848, sherifFof Franklin County;
1847, United States deputy marshal; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Democrat. History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton, Franklin and Wil-
liamson Counties, 369, 385; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Allen, WilHs: born December, 1806 (1807), in Wilson County, Tennessee;
1829, removed to Franklin (now a part of Williamson) County, Illinois, and engaged
in farming; 1834 (i836)-i838, sherifFof Franklin County; 1838-1840, represent-
ative in General Assembly; 1840, removed to Marion; 1841-1845, prosecuting
attorney for the old Third District, elected before his admission to the bar; 1841,
admitted to the bar; 1844, presidential elector; 1 844-1 848, state senator; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1851-1855, member of Congress; 1859,
judge of the Twenty-sixth Judicial Circuit; died in office June 2 (April 19), 1 859; in
politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 15;
VAmcT, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 2:856-857; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
pp. 192, 201, 216, 353, 357, 358; History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton, Franklin and
Williamson Counties, 369, 845; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.
949

9SO ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Anderson, Samuel: born 1801, in New York; 1833, came to Illinois, farmer
near Naperville, DuPage County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 357; Thompson,
Illinois Whigs before 1846, p. 137; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Archer, William R.: born April 13, 1817, in New York City; February, 1838,
admitted to New York Bar; 1838, settled in Pittsfield, Pike County, Illinois;
August, 1838, admitted to Illinois bar, and soon had extensive practice; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1856-1860, circuit clerk and recorder;
1860-1862, 1886-1888, representative in General Assembly; 1869-1870, member of
Constitutional Convention; 1877, member of joint commission appointed by legis-
lature regarding claims for damages to private property from dams on Wabash and
Illinois rivers; 1872-1884, state senator; in politics a Democrat. Biographical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 128-129; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 367, 374,
376, 378, 380, 382, 384, 389; History of Pike County, 670-671; Massie, Past and
Present of Pike County, 97, loi ; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Armstrong, George W.: born December 9, 1812 (December 11, 1813), in
Licking County, Ohio; 1830, in charge of a woolen factory; April, 1831, came to
Putnam (now Marshall) County, Illinois; July, 1831, came to LaSalle County;
1832, soldier in Black Hawk War; 1833, settled on farm near Seneca; 1837-1841,
contractor at Utica; 1841, returned to farm near Seneca, where he afterward
resided; 1844-1846, 1870-1878, representative in General Assembly; 1847, mem-
ber of Constitutional Convention; 1852-1858, 1864-1866, 1868-1876, etc., county
supervisor; 1854-1856, commissioner of highways; 1858, as Douglas Democrat,
defeated by Owen Lovejoy in congressional election; 1869, defeated as candidate
for election to Constitutional Convention; 1882, chairman of LaSalle County
Court House and Jail Building Committee; one of original promoters of the
Kankakee and Seneca Railroad; in politics a Democrat. United States Biograph-
ical Dictionary , Illinois Volume, 57-58; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia
of Illinois, 23; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 357, 373, 375, 377, 379; Bio-
graphical and Genealogical Record of LaSalle County, 1 : 121-1 22; History of LaSalle
County, Inter-State Publishing Company, 2:47, 49-51, 53-54; HoUingsworth, A
List of the Members.

Atherton, Martin: born 1801, in Kentucky; 1818, came to Illinois; farmer
near Unity, Alexander County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in
politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Ballingall, Patrick: born 1814, in Scotland; 1832, came to Illinois; 1837,
defeated as candidate for county clerk (McHenry County); 1839-1843, circuit clerk
of DuPage County; 1844-1849, state's attorney (Lake County); February, 1845-
December, 1848, state's attorney; November 13, 1846, helped arrange River and
Harbor Convention called for July, 1847; 1847, city attorney of Chicago; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1 854-1 855, city attorney; in politics a
Democrat. Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 2:634; Moses, History of Chicago,
1:103, 109, 114, 132; 2:157; Andreas, History of Cook County, 350; Goodspeed and
Healy, History of Cook County, 2:222, 224; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclo-
pedia of Illinois, DuPage County, 2:642; Richmond, History of DuPage County,
45; Halsey, History of Lake County, 57, 605.

APPENDIX 951

Blair, Montgomery: born 1809, in Ohio; 1828, came to Illinois; 1847, member
of Constitutional Convention; farmer near Barry, Pike County; 1850-1851, 1867-
1870, county supervisor; 1872, one of first vice-presidents of the Old Settlers'
Association; in politics a Democrat. Massie, Past and Present of Pike County,
89-90, 92, 1 14; History of Pike County, Charles C. Chapman and Company, 213,
3 10, 3 14; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Blakely, William H.: born 1810, in New York; 1834, came to Illinois; mer-
chant at Ewington, Effingham County; 1847, member of Constitutional Conven-
tion; 1850-1852, 1872-1874, representative in General Assembly; in politics a
Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 361, 375; HoUingsworth, A List
of the Members.

Bond, Benjamin: born 1807, in Indiana; youngest son of first governor of
Illinois; 1826, arrived in Illinois; 1830, county clerk during June term; 1830,
census commissioner; 1831-1866, practiced law in Clinton County; 1834-1836,
1856-1858, state senator; 1836, Whig candidate for presidential elector; 1836, 1846,
1857, state's attorney for Clinton County; 1837, probate justice; 1838.1840,
secretary of state Senate; 1 844-1 846, editor o( Carlyle Truth Teller; 1847, member
of Constitutional Convention; 1850, appointed United States marshal by President
Fillmore; 1851, established and edited the Prairie Flower; March to July, 1853,
editor of Age of Pros^ess; 1854-February, 1858, editor of the Calumet of Peace;
1862, arrested on account of anti-war views but "paroled" because in poor health;
died 1866, at O'Fallon, St. Clair County; in poUtics a Whig, later a Democrat.
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-19I4, pp 349-350, 352; Scon, Newspapers and Periodicals
of Illinois, 35, 42-43; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, i : 3; Pease, The Frontier
State, 238-239; Cole The Era of the Civil War, 228, 302; Thompson, Illinois
IVhigs before 1846, ■p. 132; History of Marion and Clinton Counties, 82, 85, 92,
95, 102, no; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Bosbyshell, William: born l8oo, in Pennsylvania; 1840, came to Illinois;
lawyer at Milan, Calhoun County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Brockman, James: born 1814, in Kentucky; 1833, came to Illinois; physician
at Mt. Sterling, Brown County; 1847 member of Constitutional Convention; in
politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Brown, George T.: born 1821, in Scotland; 1837, came to Illinois; lawyer and
editor at Alton, Madison County; 1843-1847, justice of the peace; 1846-1847,
mayor of Alton; 1847, member of the Constitutional Convention; 1852-1860,
founder and editor oi Alton Courier; 1854-1856, secretary of state Senate; 1856,
one of leaders in formation of Republican party in Illinois; formerly a Democrat;
sergeant-at-arms of the United States Senate for many years; died 186-, in
Washington. Scott, Newspapers and Periodicals of Illinois, 7; Cole, Era of the
Civil War, 145; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 363; History of Madison County,
165,167,210-211 383 389; HoWmg&vion'h, A List of the Members.

Bunsen, George: born February 18, 1794, at Frankfort-on-the-Maine, Ger-
many; served in Peninsular War; 1819, graduated from University of Berlin;
1819-1833, founded and maintained a boys' school at Frankfort; 1833, implicated
in the republican revolution and forced to leave the country; 1834, came to St. Clair

952 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

County, Illinois; farmer near Belleville; 1839, naturalized; teacher in the public
schools; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1855-1861, school commis-
sioner of St. Clair County; 1855, removed to Belleville and conducted a private
normal school there; 1857-1860, member of first state school board; 1857, took
part in establishment of the Illinois State Normal University; 1859, elected
member of Belleville School Board and continued as member and president for
several years prior to his death; died, November, 1872; in politics a Democrat,
later a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 66-67;
Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, St. Clair County, 2:682,
691, 873, 880; History of St. Clair County, Brink, McDonough and Company, 64,
66, 79, III, 188; Hollingsworth, .-f List of the Members.

Butler, Horace: born 18 14, at South Deerfield, New Hampshire; 1836, came to
McHenry County, Illinois; 1839, moved to Libertyville, Lake County; lawyer at
Libertyville; 1843-1855, justice of the peace; 1843-1845, probate justice; Decem-
ber 15, 1843-August 24, 1844, April 22, 1853-January 22, 1861, postmaster of
Libertyville; 1844-1846, representative in General Assembly; 1847, member of
Constitutional Convention; 1858, defeated for state senator; died March 16, i86i;
in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 357; Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encytlopedia of Illinois, Lake County, 661-663, 666; Halsey,
History of Lake County, 86, no, 455, 584, 603, 606; Hollingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Caldwell, Albert Gallatin: born 1817, in Shawneetown, Illinois; educated in
Shawneetown; leading member of Gallatin County bar; 1847, member of Constitu-
tional Convention; 1850-1851, representative in General Assembly; died in office,
1851; in politics a Democrat. Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 2:855-856;
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 361; History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton,
Franklin and IFilliamson Counties, 530-53 1 ; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Campbell, James M.: born August 22, 1803, in Frankfort, Kentucky; 1809,
brought by parents to Shawneetown, Illinois; 1815, returned to Frankfort;
educated in Frankfort Seminary; 1822-1828, deputy postmaster at Frankfort;
1828, went to Lexington, Shelby County, Kentucky; August, 1829, arrived at
Galena, Illinois; 1829-1831, worked with uncle and in office of circuit and county
clerk at Galena; 1831, went to McDonough County; 1831-1848, circuit clerk;
1831-1846, county clerk; 1831-1846, postmaster of Macomb (except for three
months in 1841, when he was removed and reinstated); 1832, served in Black Hawk
War; 1835, appointed county recorder; 1846, defeated as candidate for represent-
ative in General .Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1852-
1856, state senator; delegate to every Democratic state convention but two since
1836; 1856, i860, delegate to Democratic national conventions; 1856-1857, one
of first aldermen of Macomb; county supervisor; died 1891, in Macomb; in politics
originally a follower of Henry Clay Republicanism, but after 1832 a consistent
Democrat. United States Biographical Dictionary, Illinois Volume, 136-137;
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 362-363; Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, McDonough County, 647, 651, 745, 841; Clarke, History of
McDonough County, 27, 30, 32, 327-331, 400-404, 616, 619; Hollingsworth, A List
of the Members.

APPENDIX 953

Campbell, Thompson: born iSii, at Kennett Square, Chester County,
Pennsylvania; attended school in Butler County; educated at Jefferson College,
Canonsburg, Pennsylvania; read law and was admitted to the bar in Pittsburg;
1837, removed to Galena, Illinois; March 6, 1843-December 23, 1846, secretary
of state; wrote first public school report of the state; 1847, member of Constitu-
tional Convention; 1851-1853, representative in Congress; 1853, removed to
California as a member of United States Land Commission of California; 1855,
resumed practice of law in San Francisco; 1859, visited Europe; i860, returned to
Illinois and established practice at Chicago; i860, defeated as candidate for presi-
dential elector-at-large on Breckenridge ticket; 1861, returned to legal practice in
California; strong Union man and Republican leader; 1862-1863, representative
in Cahfornia General Assembly; 1864, delegate to Republican National Conven-
tion at Baltimore; died at San Francisco, December 6 (7), 1868; in politics a
Democrat till 1861, then a Republican. Greene and Thompson, Governors' Letter-
Books, 1840-1853, p. 64n; Bateman and SAhy, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois;
ify-TT, Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 140, 192; Palmer, Bench and Bar of
Illinois, 1:518-519, 522; Biographical Concessional Directory, 1774-1911, p. 528;
California Blue Book, 191 1, p. 241; The IForks of Hubert Howe Bancroft, 24:305n;
HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Canaday (Canady), John: born 1800, in Tennessee; 1821, came with father
to Vermilion County, Illinois; spring of 1822, returned to Tennessee for the sum-
mer; farmer near Georgetown, Vermilion County; 1840-1844, representative in
General Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1851, county
supervisor; in politics a Whig. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 354, 356;
Thompson, Illinois fVhigs before 1846, p. 138; Beckwith, History of Vermilion
County, 562-564, 586; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Carter, Thomas B.: born 1805, in New York; 1842, came to Illinois; farmer
near Freeport, Stephenson County; 1847, rnember of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Casey, Franklin S.: born 1805, in Tennessee; 1823, came to Illinois; farmer
near Mt. Vernon, Jefferson County; 1832, lieutenant in Black Hawk War; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat. Wall, History of
Jefferson County, 119; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Casey, Zadoc: born March 17, 1796, in Georgia; about 1800 brought to
Tennessee by his parents; 1817, came to Jefferson County, Illinois, and settled
near Mt. Vernon; farmer, pioneer Methodist preacher, and politician; 1819,
member of first board of county commissioners of Jefferson County; 1820, defeated
as candidate for General Assembly; 1822-1826, 1848-1852, state senator; Decem-
ber 9, 1830-March I, 1833, lieutenant-governor; 1832, served in Black Hawk War;
1833-1843, representative in Congress; 1842, defeated in congressional election by
John A. McClernand; 1847, member and president pro tem of Constitutional
Convention; 1848-1850, speaker of House in General Assembly; died September 4
(12), 1862, before expiration of his term as senator; in politics a Democrat. Bate-
man and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 83; Biographical Encyclopedia
of Illinois, 439-440; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 139, 190-191, 344-346,
366; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

954 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Choate, Charles: born 1803, in Massachusetts; 1839, came to Illinois; physi-
cian at LaHarpe, Hancock County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Church, Selden M.: born March 4, 1804, in East Haddam, Connecticut; 1804,
taken by his parents to New York, where he was reared; 1815 (1828), went to Cin-
cinnati, Ohio, and was there one of the earliest teachers in the public schools; 1829-
1835, in mercantile business in Rochester, New York; 1835, came to Chicago,
thence to Geneva, Kane County; 1836, removed to Rockford, where he afterward
resided; 1840-1847, county clerk; August, 1841-August, 1843, postmaster of
Rockford; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1849-1857, county judge
and judge of probate; 1859-1864, 1866-1867, chairman of Board of Supervisors;
1862-1864, representative in General Assembly; (1868) 1869, member of first
State Board of Public Charities; 1873, reappointed to this board, (term four years);
one of commissioners to assess damages for the government improvements at Rock
Island and to locate the government bridge between Rock Island and Davenport;
president of Rockford Insurance Company; one of originators, and for many years
managing director of the Rockford Water Power Company; died June (21), 23,
1892, at Rockford; in politics a Whig, thereafter a Republican. Bateman and
StWty, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 104-105; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
p 368; History of fyinnehago County, H. F. Kett and Company, 352, 386, 389-391,
472; Portrait and Biographical Record of ff^innebago and Boone Counties, 1 296-1 297 ;
C\\\iTc\\, History of Rockford and fVinnebago County, ^l, 61, i6-], 171, 191, 222, 24I,
264; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Churchill, Alfred: born x 800, in New York (Vermont); taken in early life to
Batavia, New York, where he was reared; 1834, came to Illinois, and settled in
Warrenville, DuPage County; February-August, 1836, county commissioner of
Cook County; fall of 1837, came to Kane County, and purchased a large claim in
Kaneville Township; 1845-1846, school commissioner of Kane County; held
various other minor township and county offices; September 27, 1845-August 16,
1849, postmaster of Avon; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1857,
removed to Rockford, and subsequently to Dade County, Missouri, where he pur-
chased 1,500 acres of land; 1861, driven out of Missouri because of his Union
sentiments, and went to Pine County Minnesota; remained there one year, but
on account of the Indian danger returned to his old home in Kane County; died
October 18, 1868, on his farm in Kaneville Township; in politics a Democrat.
Andreas, History of Cook County, 352; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia
of Illinois, Kane County, 669", 714; Past and Present of Kane County, 254, 424-426;
Commemmorative Biographical and Historical Record of Kane County, 845, 924,
1059-1060; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Cline (Kline), WilUam J.: 1846-1848, sergeant-at-arms of Senate; 1847,
doorkeeper pro tem of Constitutional Convention; lived in Kane County. Blue
Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 358; Journal of the Convention, 1847, volume 3.

Cloud, Newton: born 1805, in North Carolina; 1827, settled near Waverly,
Morgan County, Illinois; 1830-1832, 1834-1840, 1842-1844, 1846-1848, 1870-1872,
representative in General Assembly; 1 844-1 846, clerk of House; 1 846-1 848, speaker
of House; 1847, member and president of Constitutional Convention; 1848-1852,

APPENDIX 95S

state senator; fall of 1855-April, 1856, temporary principal of Illinois Deaf and
Dumb Institute at Jacksonville; preacher of Methodist church; farmer; in
politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, His/orica! Encyclopedia of Illinois, 108;
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 348, 350-351. 353. 356-357. 359-361. 373;
Rummel, Illinois Hand-Book and Legislative Manual for 1871, pp. 178, 186; History
of Morgan County, 322; Eames, Historic Morgan and Classic Jacksonmlle, S9, 78,
97, no, 114, 121, 181, 268; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Colby, Eben F.: born 18 15, in Vermont; 1843, came to Illinois; farmer near
WicklifFe, Cook County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; died
August 24, 1884; in politics a Democrat. Andreas, History of Chicago, 3:397;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Constable, Charles Henry: born July 6, 18 17, at Chestertown, Maryland;
attended Belle Air Academy; 1838, graduated from the University of Virginia;
studied law and admitted to the bar; (1839) 1840, came to Mount Carmel, Illinois;
1844-1848, state senator; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1852,
removed to Marshall, Clark County; 1852, defeated as Whig candidate for Congress
by James C Allen; 1B56, presidential elector-at-large on the Buchanan ticket;
July I, i86i-October 9, 1865, judge of circuit court; March, 1863, arrested at
Charleston because of his anti-war action in releasing four deserters and holding to
bail, on charge of kidnapping, two Union officers who had arrested them; although
he was released, the affair contributed to the causes of the Charleston riot of March
22, 1863; died in office, October 9, 1865; in politics a Whig until 1854, thereafter a
Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 117; Blue
Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 201, 214, 357-358; Cole, The Era of the Civil H^ar,
149, 302; Combined History of Edwards, Lawrence and Wabash Counties, 132;
History of Crawford and Clark Counties, part 2, pp. 291-292; Hollingsworth, A
List of the Members.

Crain, John; born 1803, in Tennessee; 1810, brought to Illinois; farmer near
Nashville, Washington County; 1836-1842, representative in General Assembly;
1842-1846, state senator; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in politics
a Democrat. Ford, History of Illinois, 194-195, Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
PP- 351. 353-355. 357; Thompson, Illinois Whigs before 1S46, pp. 133,139; Hollings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Cross, Robert J.: born October 1, 1803, in Newburgh, Orange County, New
York; spent greater part of minority in Bethel, Sullivan County, New York; 1825,
went to Tecumseh, Lenaine County, Michigan; 1830, removed to Coldwater,
Michigan; 1835, came to Winnebago County, Illinois; one of earhest settlers in
Roscoe Township; farmer all his Ufe; assisted in organization of Winnebago
County; 1836, one of first judges of election in Winnebago County; 1836, elected
justice of the peace; 1836-1839, first county treasurer; 1841, first vice-president of
Winnebago County Agricultural Society; 1846-1848, 1872-1873, representative in
General Assembly; 1847, 1 869-1 870, member of Constitutional Convention; 1861,
defeated as candidate for election to Constitutional Convention of 1862; 1862,
delegate to Union State Convention; 1868-1872, chairman of Board of Supervisors;
township school fund trustee over thirty years; died February 15, 1873; in politics
a Whig, later a Republican. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 359, 375;

956 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

History of Winnebago County, 236, 245, 353, 386, 389, 391-392, 618-619; Church,
History of Rockford and IVinnehago County, :ig, S3, 121, 172, 191, 264; Illinois
State Journal, September 25, 1862; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Cross, Samuel J.: born 1806, in Pennsylvania; 1839, came to Illinois; 1841-
1852, first circuit clerk of Woodford County; lived at Metamora, Woodford County;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1859, first president of Board of
Trustees of Metamora; in politics a Democrat. Moore, History of Woodford
County, 97, 146, 182; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Dale, Michael G.: born November 30, 1814 (1816), in Lancaster, Pennsylvania;
attended West Chester Academy; 1835, graduated from Pennsylvania College at
Gettysburg; 1837, admitted to the bar; 1838, came to Illinois; settled in Green-
ville, Bond County; 1 839-1 853, probate judge of Bond County; 1844, commis-
sioned major of state militia; 1847, member of military court at Alton; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1852, delegate to Democratic National
Convention; 1853, removed to Edwardsville, Madison County; 1853-1857, register
of United States land office at Edwardsville; 1855-1863, master in chancery;
December, 1857-December, 1865, January, (1876) 1877-December, 1886, county
judge of Madison County; president of Board of Education of Edwardsville;
died April i, 1895 ('896), at Edwardsville; in politics a Democrat. Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 126-127; Biographical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, 292-293; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:2, 526; 2:697-699; Perrin,
History of Bond and Montgomery Counties, 171-172, 177, 339, History of Madi-
son County, 192, 360-361; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Davis, David: born March 9(19), 1815, in Cecil County, Maryland; 1832,
graduated from Kenyon College, Ohio; studied law at Yale; 1835, came to Pekin,
Illinois; 1836, settled at Bloomington, and practiced law; 1840, defeated as candi-
date for state senator by John Moore; 1844-1846, representative in General
Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; December 4, 1848-
November i, 1862, judge of the Eighth Judicial Circuit; i860, delegate-at-large
to Republican National Convention; i86i, member of commission to investigate
Department of the Missouri; November, 1862— March, 1877, United States
Supreme Court justice; 1 872, nominated for president by Labor Reform party, and
one of leading candidates for the Liberal Republican nomination; 1 877-1 883,
United States senator; October, 1881-March 3, 1883, president pro tern of the
United States Senate; died June 26, 1886, at his home in Bloomington; in politics
a Whig, later an Independent Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Ency-
clopedia of Illinois, 128; United States Biographical Dictionary, Illinois Volume,
16-20; Encyclopedia of Biography of Illinois, 1:9-14; Palmer, Bench and Bar of
///;no<j, 1:154, 541-549; Illinois Handbook for 1870, -p. 181; Blue Book of Illinois,
1913-1914 pp. 154, 215, 357; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Davis, James M.: born October 9, (1793) 1803, in Barren County, Kentucky;
1 8 17, settled in Bond County, Illinois, where he is said to have taught the first school;
ran a store in Greenville; 1842-1844, 1858-1860, representative in General Assem-
bly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention from Montgomery and Bond
counties; 1849, register of the land oflnce at Vandalia; practiced law at Hills-
boro; died September 17, 1866 (1868), at Hillsboro, where he had long made

APPENDIX 957

his home; in politics a Whig; later a Democrat and a bitter opponent of the war
policy of President Lincoln. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia oj Illi-
nois, 128; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:526; 2:967-969; Blue Book of
Illinois, 19IJ-1914, pp. 356, 366; Perrinj/Z/j/ory of Bond and Montgomery Counties,
part 2, p. 72; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Davis, Thomas G. C: born 1814, in Virginia; (1842) 1843 (1844), came to
Illinois and settled in Golconda, Pope County; lawyer; one of the most popular
orators in the state; 1 846-1 848, state senator; removed to Metropolis, Massac
County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1850, independent Demo-
cratic candidate for Congress, but defeated by Willis Allen; removed to Paducah,
Kentucky, afterwards to St. Louis, Missouri; leading lawyer there many years;
late in Hfe established a home in Denton, Texas; died in Texas, 1888; in politics a
Democrat. P&\meT, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 2:Ssj, 121 1; Blue Book of Illinois,
1913-1914, p. 358; Page, History of Massac County, 71-73; Hollingsworth, J List
of the Members.

Dawson, John: born 1791 (1792), in Virginia; 1827 (1828), removed to San-
gamon County, Illinois; 1830-1832, 1834-1840, representative in General Assem-
bly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; farmer; died November 12, 1850;
in politics a Whig. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 129;
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 348, 350-351, 353; Hollingsworth, A List of
the Members.

Deitz, Peter W.: born January 29, 1808, near Oneonta, Otsego County, New
York; educated in common schools and Cazenovia Seminary; 1833, left for the
West, spending time in Michigan and Indiana surveying, teaching, and reading law;
1836, admitted to the bar at Rushville, Indiana; returned to New York; 1837,
came to Illinois; began farming near Marengo, McHenry County; 1842, defeated
as candidate for representative in General Assembly; 1843-1845, county school
commissioner; 1845, moved to Marengo; 1847, member of Constitutional Conven-
tion; 1857-1858, 1 863-1 868, county supervisor; 1865, chairman of Board of Super-
visors; 1868-1870, representative in General Assembly; in politics a Whig, later a
Republican. History of McHenry County, Inter-State Publishing Company, 219,
222-225, 759~76o; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 372; Hollingsworth, A List
of the Members.

Dement, John: born April 26, 1804, in Gallatin, Sumner County, Tennessee;
1817, accompanied his parents to Franklin County, Illinois; 1826, elected sheriff of
Franklin County; 1828-1832, 1836-1837, representative in General Assembly;
1832, served with distinction in Black Hawk War; February i, 1831-December 3,
1836, state treasurer; removed to Vandalia; 1837, removed to Galena; 1837-1841,
1845-1849, 1853 — t'" office abolished, receiver of public money. United States
Land Office, by appointments of Presidents Van Buren, Polk, and Pierce; 1840,
removed to Dixon, Lee County, where he afterwards resided; 1844, Democratic
presidential elector; a farmer in 1847 but became a successful manufacturer and
capitalist at Dixon; 1847, 1862, 1870, member of Constitutional Convention,
temporary president in :862, 1870; 1859, elected mayor of Dixon, but failed to
qualify; 1869-1872, 1878-1879, mayor of Dixon; died at his home at Dixon,
January 16 (17), 1883; in politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical

958 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Encyclopedia of Illinois, 132; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 141, 201
347-348, 351; United States Biographical Dictionary, Illinois Volume, 780-781;
Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 267-268; Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, Lee County, 648, 650, 672, 770; Hollingsworth, A List of
the Members,

Dummer, Henry E.: born April 9, 1808, at Hallowell, Maine; 1827, graduated
from Bowdoin College; studied law at Cambridge Law School; 1832, came to
Springfield, Illinois, where for a time he was a law partner of John T. Stuart; 1838,
removed to Beardstown, Cass County; 1843-1847, i849-(?), judge of probate;
served as alderman and city attorney; 1 847, member of Constitutional Convention;
1860-1864, state senator; 1864, delegate-at-large to Republican National Con-
vention at Baltimore; 1864, removed to Jacksonville, where he practiced law;
died August 12, 1878, in Mackinac, Michigan; in politics a Whig, later a Republican.
Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 606; Palmer, Bench and
Bar of Illinois, 1:3, 166, 338-339; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 366-367;
Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Cass County, 2: 703; Perrin,
History of Cass County, 57-58, 116-117; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Dunlap, James: born October 30, 1802, in Fleming County, Kentucky; (1830)
(1831) (1834), arrived in Illinois and engaged in general merchandise business;
1834-1837, trustee of town of Jacksonville; 1838, contracted to build the first rail-
road in Illinois, Meredosia to Springfield; 1845, road completed; 1846, colonel in
Mexican War; 1847, bought with others the Northern Cross Railroad at public
auction; dealt largely in real estate and was prominent farmer and stock dealer;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; instrumental in securing state
institutions for Jacksonville; member of first Board of Trustees of the Central
Hospital for the Insane; member of first Board of Trustees of the School for the
Blind; 1857, opened the "Dunlap House"; 1861, became strong Union man;
1861-1864, served as chief quartermaster of Thirteenth Army Corps; in politics a
Democrat. Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 301-302; Greene and Thomp-
son, Governors' Letter-Books, 1840-1853, p. io6n; Eames, Historic Morgan and
Classic Jacksonville, 78, 97, 102, 105, ill, 123, 126-127; Hollingsworth, A List of
the Members.

Dunn, Harvey: born 1806, in New York; in boyhood went to Indiana, later
to Ohio; 1835 (1837), came to Morgan County, Illinois; 1839, moved to Pike
County; 1840, engaged in general merchandise business in Chambersburg, later
a farmer near Chambersburg; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; held
various local offices; 1858, county supervisor; 1861, unsuccessful Republican
candidate for county clerk; died December, 1869; in politics a Democrat, later a
Republican. Massie, Past and Present of Pike County, 90, 468; History of Pike
County, Charles C. Chapman and Company, 312, 409, 883; Hollingsworth, A List
of the Members.

Dunsmore, Daniel: born 1793, in New York; 1816, came to Illinois; farmer
near Exeter, Scott County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in politics
a Whig. Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Eccles, Joseph T.: born January 7, 1807, in Mercer County, Kentucky;
educated chiefly in Harrodsburg, Kentucky; 1830, came to Fayette County,

APPENDIX

959

Illinois; 1830-1832, taught school at Vandalia; 1832, served in Black Hawk War;
clerked in store one year, then engaged in mercantile business for himself for
several years; farmed near Vandalia about nine years; 1847, member of Constitu-
tional Convention; removed to Hillsboro, Montgomery County, where he again
engaged in mercantile business, and retired after several years; justice of the peace
for several years at Vandalia and Hillsboro; assistant assessor and United States
deputy revenue collector; i860, nominated Richard Yates for governor; recruiting
officer at Hillsboro during the war; 1862, delegate to Union State Convention;
in politics a Whig, later a Republican. Perrin, History 0/ Bond and Montgomery
Counties, part 2, p. 103; Illinois State Journal, September 25, 1862; HoUingsworth,
A List of the Members.

Edmonson, J. William F.: born 1816, in Maryland; 1840, came to Illinois;
merchant at Vandalia, Fayette County; 1847, member of Constitutional Conven-
tion; in politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Edwards, Cyrus: born January 17, 1793, in Montgomery County, Maryland;
1800, removed to Kentucky; 1815, admitted to the bar at Kaskaskia, Illinois;
1815-1827 (1829), resided alternately in Kentucky and Missouri; 1827 (1829),
took up residence at Edwardsville; engaged in business and later moved to Upper
Alton; 1832, served in Black Hawk War; 1832-1834, 1840-1842, 1860-1862,
representative in General Assembly; 1834-1838, state senator; 1838, defeated as
candidate for governor; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1852, received
degree of LL.D. from ShurtlefF College; died September, 1877, at Upper Alton;
a patron of education and public charities; in politics a Whig and later a Republi-
can. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 152; Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 349-350, 354, 367, 452; HoUingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Edwards, Ninian Wirt: born April 15, 1809, at Frankfort, Kentucky; family
removed in same year to Illinois, where his father became territorial governor;
spent boyhood at Kaskaskia, Edwardsville, and Belleville; 1832, married Elizabeth
P. Todd, a sister of Mrs. Abraham Lincoln; 1833, graduated from Transylvania
University; 1834-1835, attorney general; 1835, removed to Springfield; 1836-
1840, 1848-1851, representative in General Assembly until resignation because of
change from Whig to Democratic principles; 1 844-1 848, state senator; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1851, defeated in special election to succeed
himself as a Democrat in General Assembly; 1852, appointed attorney for commis-
sioners to investigate claims of canal contractors; 1854-1857, state superintendent
of public instruction by appointment of Governor Matteson; i86i (1862)— June,
1865, captain commissary of subsistence, by appointment of President Lincoln;
June, 1865, retired to private Hfe; 1870, published History of Illinois, 1778-1833,
prepared at the request of the State Historical Society; died at Springfield, Sep-
tember 2, J889; in poUtics a Whig until 1851, thereafter a Democrat. Bateman
and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 152-153; Palmer, Bench and Bar of
Illinois, 1:174-175; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 142, 351, 353, 357-358,
360, 362; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Evey, Edward: born (1813) 1815, in Maryland; 1 837, came to lUinois; lawyer
at ShelbyvUle, Shelby County; 1 839-1 849, probate justice of the peace; 1847,

96o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

member of Constitutional Convention; 1848-1850, representative in General
Assembly; 1854, went to Los Angeles, California; 1862, member of California
Assembly as Union Democrat; 1878, member of second California Constitutional
Convention; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book 0} Illinois., 1913-1914, p. 360;
Tiateimin 3.niiSt\hy, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Shelby County, 2:686, 688,
733; California Blue Book, 191 1, p. 252; T/ie IVorks of Hubert Howe Bancroft, 24:
294n, 404; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Ewing, James T.: born 1828, in Illinois; clerk at Vandalia, Fayette County;
1847, assistant secretary of Constitutional Convention. Hollingsworth, A List of
the Members.

Farwell, Seth B.: born 1810, in New York; went from New York to Ohio;
came to Ottawa, Illinois, (1834) 1835; lawyer; 1838, 1841-1842, 1842-1843,
state's attorney; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; residence in 1847
in Freeport, Stephenson County; removed to California and elected judge there;
died on way from Kansas to California; in politics a Democrat. Baldwin, History
of LaSalte County, 218, 231-232; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, Kane County, 670; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
Kendall County, 2:760; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Frick, Frederick: born 1797, in Pennsylvania; 1838, came to Illinois; farmer
near Bluff, Mercer County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in
politics a Democrat. Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Geddes, Thomas: born 1805, in Pennsylvania; 1835, came to Illinois; farmer
near Fountain Green, Hancock County; 1847, member of Constitutional Conven-
tion; in politics a Whig. YioVimgsvionh., A List of the Members.

Graham, James: born 1792, in North Carolina; 1836, came to Illinois; farmer
near CarlinviUe, Macoupin County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Whig. Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Green, Henry R.: born 1788, in Rhode Island; 1837, came to Illinois; farmer
near Delavan, Tazewell County; 1841, laid out the city of Delavan; 1846, one of
first deacons of Baptist Church of Delavan; 1847, member of Constitutional Con-
vention; 1862, delegate to Union State Convention; 1863, county supervisor;
referred to in Convention as "the reverend member from Tazewell"; in politics a
Whig, later a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia cf Illinois,
Tazewell County, 2:826, 829, 840; Illinois State Journal, September 25, 1862;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Green, Peter: born 1807, in Kentucky; lived many years in Salem, Indiana,
where he ran a furniture shop, ox-mill and distillery, and was expelled from the
Methodist church on account of the latter occupation; also studied and practiced
medicine while in Indiana; 1827, came to Illinois (1829 to Clay County); settled
in Mayville, (now Clay City), where he practiced medicine, ran a hotel, and opened
a general store; 1836-1844, representative in General Assembly; platted town of
Louisville, influential in securing removal of county seat there, and went there to
continue the practice of his profession; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
invested largely in Louisville land, at one time owning six hundred acres; a physi-
cian of more than ordinary ability; a leader and politician of some note; died in
Louisville, 1870; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,

APPENDIX 961

PP- 352-354. 356; Thompson, Illinois Whigs before 1846, p. 142; History of Wayne
and Clay Counties, 376, 379-380, 397; HoUingsworth, ^ List of the Members.

Green, William B.: born 1807, in Ohio; 1822, came to Illinois; i847,memberof
Constitutional Convention; engineer in Galena, Jo Daviess County; in politics a
Whig. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Gregg, David L.: born 18 15, in New York; (1839) emigrated from Albany to
Joliet, Illinois, where he began the practice of law; 1839, editor o( Joliet Courier;
1842-1846, representative in General Assembly; removed to Chicago, where he
served as United States district attorney; 1847, member of Constitutional Conven-
tion; 1849, professor of Rhetoric and Belles Lettres in the University of St. Mary's
of the Lake at Chicago; April 2, 1850— January lo, 1853, secretary of state; 1852,
defeated for Democratic nomination for governor by Joel A. Matteson; 1852,
Democratic presidential elector; 1853, appointed commissioner to the Sandwich
Islands; later acted for a time as minister or adviser of King Kamehamaha IV;
returned to California; appointed by President Lincoln as receiver of public
moneys at Carson City, Nevada; died December 23, 1868, at Carson City. Bate-
man and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 209; Greene and Thompson,
Governors' Letter-Books, 1 840-1 853, p. 233n; Scott, Newspapers and Periodicals of
Illinois, 207; Cole, The Era of the Civil War, 102; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
pp. 140,201,356-357; f^n^tas. History of Chicago, 1:298; HoUingsworth, A List
of the Members.

Grimshaw, William A.: born June i, 1813, at Navin-on-the-Boyne, County
Meath, Ireland (Bateman and Selby say Philadelphia); 1815, brought by parents
to the United States on vessel bringing to Charleston, South Carolina, the first
news of the Treaty of Ghent; father of English descent but born in Belfast, and
later a member of the Philadelphia bar and a distinguished historian; 1832, admit-
ted to the bar in Philadelphia at age of nineteen; 1833, came to Pike County,
lUinois, lived at Atlas for a short time, afterward resided at Pittsfield; 1833, ap-
pointed adjutant of the seventeenth militia regiment; commissioned by Governor
Reynolds as public administrator of Pike County; 1840, 1848, unsuccessful candi-
date for representative in General Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention, and author of the article prohibiting dueling; 1864, delegate to the
Repubhcan National Convention; for twelve years trustee of the state Institution
for the Blind at Jacksonville; 1877-188 2, member of State Board of Charities; for
many years trustee and school director of Pittsfield; 1880, Republican presidential
elector; president and director of Pike County Agricultural Society; one of origin-
ators of Old Settlers' Association; died January 7, 1895, at Pittsfield; in politics
a Whig, thereafter a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, 212; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 2o2; Massie, Past and Present of
Pike County, 174-181; Hi.tory of Pike County, Charles C. Chapman and Company,
682-683; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Harding, Abner Clark: born February 10, 1807, in East Hampton, Middlesex
County, Connecticut; 1815, removed with parents to Plainfield, Herkimer County,
New York; educated in public schools and academy at Hamilton, New York;
1821, enlisted in the navy, but rejected on account of small stature; 1821-1825,
engaged in teaching and other vocations; 1 826-1 827, read law at Bridge-

962 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

water, New York; 1828, removed to Pennsylvania and admitted to the bar
at Lewisburg; 1836, elected member of Constitutional Convention of Penn-
sylvania; 1838, came to Illinois, and established a home at Monmouth,
Warren County; practiced law, became active in politics, and was regarded as a
leader of the Whig party; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1847-1849,
county school commissioner; 1848-1850, representative in General Assembly;
1851, abandoned practice of law on account of failing eyesight, and until about
i860, engaged in traveling for his health; interested in railroad enterprises; 1862,
instrumental in organizing Eighty-third Illinois Volunteer Infantry; enlisted as a
private, was elected and commissioned colonel, and on May 22, 1863, made briga-
dier-general, probably because of his skill and gallantry in defending Fort Donelson
after its capture by the Union Army; 1865-1869, Republican representative in
Congress; May-October, 1871, traveled in Europe; accumulated a fortune of
about ?2,ooo,ooo; one of first trustees of Monmouth College; endowed a professor-
ship; died July (10) 19, 1874, in Monmouth. Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 220; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 193, 360;
Biographical Congressional Directory, 1774-1911, p. 703; Bateman and Selby,
Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, IVarren County, 2:706, 708, 761, 833-834;
Portrait and Biographical Album of Warren County, Chapman Brothers, S41-543;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Harlan, Justin: born December 6, 1800, in Warren County, Ohio; educated in
the pubHc schools; taught school; studied law in Cincinnati under Judge McLean,
later associate justice of the United States Supreme Court; 1825, came to Darwin,
Clark County, Illinois; 1832, served in Black Hawk War; 1 835-1 861, circuit
judge; 1840, removed to Marshall, where he afterward resided; 1847, member of
Constitutional Convention; 1862-1865, Indian agent under President Lincoln;
1873-1877, county judge of Clark County; died March 12, 1879, while visiting a
daughter in Kentucky; in politics a Whig, thereafter a Republican. Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 221; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
p. 214; History of Crawford and Clark Counties, part 2, p. 288, part 3, p. 25; Hollings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Harper, Joshua: born 1801, in Virginia; 1836, came to Illinois; farmer near
Morristown, Henry County; 1842-1846, representative in General Assembly;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Whig. Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 356-357; Thompson, Illinois Whigs before 1846, p. 142;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Harvey, Curtis K.: born 1815, in Vermont; 1836, came to Knoxville, Illinois;
pioneer member of Knox County bar; 1 840-1 847, school commissioner of Knox
County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat;
died suddenly, 1847. Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:450; Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Knox County, 633; Hollingsworth, A
List of the Members.

Hatch, Jeduthan: born 1809, in New Hampshire; 1836, came to Illinois;
farmer near Naperville, DuPage County; 1 842-1 844, representative in General
Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1851, county supervisor;
i8j2, coanty judge; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,

APPENDIX 963

p. 356; Thompson, Illinois IVhigs before 1846, p. 142; Bateman and Selby,
Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, DuPage County, 2: 643, 645, 654, 656, 682-683;
Richmond, History of DuPage County, 44, 46, 5 1 ; Hollingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Hawley, Nelson: born 1809, 'i Vermont; 1839, came to Illinois; physician at
Palestine, Crawford County; 1845-1853, county school commissioner; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat. History of Craw-
ford and Clark Counties, part :, p. 51; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Hay, Daniel: born 1781, in Virginia; 1816, came to Illinois; July 15, 1816,
appointed county treasurer of White County; January 14, 18 17— August, 1818,
justice of the peace for White County; June 17, 1817, appointed captain of Rifle
Company, Fifth Regiment; January, 1818, appointed census commissioner; 1824-
1828, state senator; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; a farmer; in
politics a Whig. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 344-345; Territorial Register,
1809-1818, pp. 42, 45, 49, 54, 60; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Hayes, Samuel Snowden (Snowdon): born December 25, 1820, in Nashville,
Tennessee; educated in Nashville and Cincinnati; 1837, employed in drug store in
Louisville, Kentucky; August, 1838, removed to Shawneetown, Illinois; 1838-
1840, engaged in drug business at Shawneetown; 1842, admitted to the bar and
settled in Mt. Vernon; shortly afterward removed to Carmi, White County; 1843,
1844, stumped southern Illinois for the Democratic ticket; 1845, delegate to
Memphis Commercial Convention; 1846-1850, representative in General Assem-
bly; 1847, raised company for service in Mexican War, but was never mustered in;
1847, 1870, member of Constitutional Convention, the youngest member of
the Convention of 1847; 1848, Democratic presidential elector; appointed by
Governor French as honorary aide de camp with rank of colonel; winter of 1850-
1851, removed to Chicago; as friend of Douglas, opposed the repeal of the Missouri
Compromise, but supported Buchanan; i860, delegate to Democratic National
Convention at Charleston and Baltimore, and canvassed the state for Douglas;
supported the Union cause, but opposed the government war policies; 1858-1861,
1864-1865, member of Chicago Board of Education; 1862-1865, 1873-1876, city
comptroller; (1866), member of United States Revenue Commission, and brought
by his report into national prominence; 1867-1870, trustee of Illinois Industrial
University; 1872, appointed one of first directors of the Chicago Public Library;
1 876,defeated as candidate for presidential elector. Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, llG-ii-]; Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 465-467;
Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:5; 2:647-648; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-
1914, pp. 201,359-360; Moses, History of Chicago, 1:218, 220; Andreas, History
of Chicago, 2:103-105; 3:847, 860; Powell, Semi-Centennial History of the Uni-
versity of Illinois, 1:338, 344; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Heacock, Reuben E. (B.): born 1818, in Illinois; son of Russell E. Heacock;
farmer near Summit, Cook County; 1847, member of ConstitutionaljjConvention;
1850, first commissioner of highways of Lyons Township; 1852, overseer of the
poor; in politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, 228; Andreas, History of Cook County, 810; Hollingsworth, A List of the
Members.

964 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Henderson, Hugh: born i8io, in New York; 1836, came to Illinois; lawyer in
Joliet, Will County; 1839, one of founders and publishers of Joliet Courier; 1843,
appointed by Governor Ford as counsel for the state to aid the appraisers of damages
on the canal; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1849-1854, circuit
judge; died in office, 1854. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 215; Scott,
Newspapers and Periodicals of Illinois, 207; Greene and Thompson, Governors'
Lelter-Books, 1 840-1 853, p. 80; HoUingsworth, /I List of the Members.

Hill, George H. (W.): born May 20, 18 10, in Rensselaer County, New York;
1835, came to Illinois; farmer near Genoa, DeKalb County; 1835, one of commit-
tee of five to settle disputed titles to claims; justice of the peace for many years;
1837-1839, first treasurer and assessor of DeKalb County; 1846-1850, county
commissioner; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; (1849-1855), post-
master of Kingston; associate county judge four years; 1854-1862 (1857-1861),
county judge; county supervisor for five years; township treasurer thirty years;
died 1890, on his farm in DeKalb County; in politics a Democrat, later a Republi-
can. Gros^^PasI and Present of DeKalb Counly, 1:59, 79, 81-82, 96,157-159, 162,
302-303, 327; Portrait and Biogrfiphical Album of DeKalb County, Chapman
Brothers, 351-352; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Hoes, Abraham: born 1814, in New York; brother of John V. A. Hoes; 1841,
came to Illinois; lawyer at Ottawa, LaSalle County; 1847, member of Constitu-
tional Convention; died (1856); in politics a Democrat. History of LaSalle
County, Inter-State Publishing Company, 1:392; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illi-
nois, 2:818; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Hogue, James M.: born 1812, in Tennessee; 1817, came to lUinois; farmer
near Fairfield, Wayne County; 1839-1841, circuit clerk; 1847, member of Con-
stitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat. History of Wayne and Clay
Counties, part 2, p. 337; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Holmes, William H.: born 1809, in New York; 1834, came to lUinois; lawyer
at Pekin, Tazewell County; 1838-1839, village clerk of Pekin; 184I, assessor of
Pekin; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Whig. Bateman
and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Tazewell County, 2:900; HoUings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Hunsaker, Samuel: born 1795, in Kentucky; 1810, came to Illinois; farmer
near Jonesboro, Union County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in
politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Hurlbut, Stephen Augustus: born November 29, 1815 (1819), at Charleston,
South CaroUna; received thorough liberal education; 1837, admitted to the bar;
(1838) (1845), removed to Belvidere, Boone County, Illinois; 1847, member of the
Constitutional Convention; 1848, defeated for presidential elector; 1858-1862,
1866-1868, representative in General Assembly; May, 186 1— July, 1865, served in
war as brigadier-general and major-general; 1868, presidential elector; 1869-1872,
minister resident to the United States of Columbia; 1873-1877, representative in
Congress; 1876, defeated for reelection as Independent Republican; 1881-1882,
minister resident to Peru; first commander-in-chief of the Grand Army of the
Republic; died March 27, 1882, at Lima, Peru; in politics a Whig until 1856,
thereafter a Republican. Bateman and Selby Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,

APPENDIX 965

I40-241; Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 4^o\ Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-
1914, pp. 194, 202, 366-367, 370; Biographical Congressional Directory, 1774-igii,
p. 749; Ch\irc\\, History of Rockford and IVinnebago County, 264, 330-331; Hol-
lingsworth, A List of the Members.

Huston, John: born May 17, 1808, near Sparta, White County, Tennessee;
1828 (1829), came to Ilhnois and settled near Jacksonville; 1830, removed to farm
near Blandinsville, McDonough County, where he afterward resided; September,
1830-March 17, 1831, first county treasurer of McDonough County; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1850-1852, representative in General
Assembly; 1852, defeated for reelection; died July 8, 1854; in politics a Democrat.
Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, McDonough County, 669,
916; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 362; Clarke, History of McDonough
County, 23, 32, 376-380, 402-404; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Jackson, Aaron C: born October 29, 1800, in Morristown, New Jersey; 1805,
taken to Fort Pitt, Pennsylvania; later taken to Knox County, Ohio; 1837,
emigrated to Illinois; farmer near Union Grove, Whiteside County; 1839, com-
missioned justice of the peace; 1842-1844, representative in General Assembly;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1852-1857, county supervisor;
postmaster of Morrison during Lincoln's administration; in politics a Whig.
Bent, History of JVhiteside County, 67, 104, 292, 295, 298-299; Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 356; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

James, James A.: born 1794 (1798), in Maryland (Kentucky); 1803 (1804),
came to Illinois; attended college at Beardstown, Kentucky; farmer near Harrison-
ville, Monroe County; 1827, colonel of state militia; 1840-1844, state senator;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 354-355; History of Randolph, Monroe and Peiry Counties,
I49, 413-4I4; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Jenkins, Alexander M.: born 1802 (1803) in South Carolina; 1817, came to
Jackson County, Illinois; learned trade of carpenter; served as constable; 1830-
1834, representative in General Assembly; 1832-1834, speaker; 1832, captain in
Black Hawk War; 1834-1836, lieutenant-governor; 1836, president of first Illinois
Central Railroad Company; 1836-1838, receiver of public moneys in land office at
Edwardsville; studied law during residence at Edwardsville and practiced at
Murphysboro; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1855, edited Jacksoti
Democrat; iS^;, estahWshed Murphysboro Sentinel; .'August 27, 1859-February 13,
1864, circuit judge of Third Judicial Circuit; died in office, February 13, 1864; in
politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 304;
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 139, 214, 348-349; Scott, Newspapers and
Periodicals of Illinois, 256-257; History of Jackson County, 14, 17, 22, 57; History
of Madison County, 186; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Jones, Humphrey B.: born 1799, in Christian County, Kentucky; (1819)
1821, came to Illinois, and settled in Brownsville, Jackson County; 1827, removed
to Pinckneyville, Perry County; physician, later a lawyer; 1827, one of commis-
sioners to lay out county seat; 1827, commissioned one of first justices of the peace
in Perry County; first postmaster of Pinckneyville; first master in chancery in
Perry County; 1827-1839, 1841-1855, first county clerk; 1827-1843, first clerk of

966 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

circuit court; 1828-1847, 1849, first probate judge; 1835-1839, county recorder,
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; died November 18, 1855, in Pinckney-
ville; in politics a Whig. History of Randolph, Monroe and Perry Counties, 85,
162-167, 178-179, 188, 191, 335, 337-338; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Judd, Thomas: born September 4, 1812, in East Charlemont, Franklin County,
Massachusetts; 1835, came to Chicago, Illinois; later engaged in farming in Du
Page County; removed to Kane County and opened first blacksmith shop in Elgin;
traveled with the government survey for a short time; fall of 1836, began farming
in Sugar Grove Township, Kane County; assisted in building Chicago and Iowa
Railroad through Sugar Grove Township; first station agent at Sugar Grove;
county supervisor for two years; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
November 13, 1849-October 20, 1855, October 26, 1857-October 11, 1880,
postmaster of Sugar Grove; one of founders of Sugar Grove Normal and Industrial
Institute; in politics a Whig; died January 11, 1881. Bateman and Selby,
Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Kane County, 831; Past and Present oj Kane
County, 413, 420-421, 658; Commemorative Biographical and Historical Record of
Kane County, 928, 1 103; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Kenner, Alvin R.: born 1809, in Ohio; 1825, came to Illinois; farmer near
Albion, Edwards County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1862,
delegate to Union State Convention; in politics a Whig, later a Republican.
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Kinney Simon: born 1786, in Pennsylvania; 1836, came to Illinois; lawyer at
Windsor, (now Tiskilwa), Bureau County; 1847, member of Constitutional Con-
vention; in politics a Whig. Matson, Map of Bureau County, with Sketches of Its
Early Settlement, 50; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Kinney, William C: born 18 19, in Illinois; son of former Lieutenant-Governor
Kinney; 1839, began practice of law at Belleville; 1839, 1856, 1858, prosecuting
attorney; 1841-1845, circuit clerk and ex-officio recorder of deeds; 1847, member
of Constitutional Convention; 1848, state's attorney; 1854-1856, representative in
General Assembly; 1857-1858, adjustant-general; died in office, 1858; in politics
a Democrat, later a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, 317-318; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 144, 364; Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, St. Clair County, 2:684, 687, 690, 703,
743, 749, 831; History of St. Clair County, Brink, McDonough and Company,
77-79, 90, 94; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Kitchell, Alfred: born March 29, 1820, at Palestine, Crawford County;
received his education at Hillsboro Academy and Indiana State University; 1841,
admitted to the bar; 1842, began practice of law at Olney, Richland County;
1843-1853, state's attorney; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1849-
1852, judge of Richland County; 1849-1850, edited Olney News, first newspaper
established in Olney; 1859-1861, circuit judge of the Twenty-fifth Judicial Circuit;
promoter and director of the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad; 1866, removed to
Galesburg, where he died, November 11, 1876; in politics a Democrat until 1856,
thereafter a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
319-320; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 216; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illi-
nois, 1:126; Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 481; Scott, Newspapers and

APPENDIX 967

Periodicals of Illinois, 265; Counties of Cumberland, Jasper, and Richland, Historical
and Biographical, 639, 657, 712; Perrin, History of Crawford and Clark Counties,
part I, pp. 57-58.

Knapp, Augustus R.: born iSoi (1802), in Connecticut; removed in youth to
New York and studied medicine in New York City; 1823-1839, physician in
New York City; 1839, went to Kane, Green County, Illinois; 1844, removed to
Jerseyville, Jersey County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1849,
went to California as a gold hunter; 1854, returned to Jerseyville, where he died
July 13, 1862; in politics a Whig. History of Greene and Jersey Counties, 152,
156-157, 725-726; Cooper, History of Jerseyville, 78-79; Hollingsworth, A List of
the Members.

Knapp, Nathan Morse: born March 4, 18 15, in Royalton, Vermont (New
Hampshire); 1837, came to Naples, Scott County, lUinois; 1837-1838, edited
Spirit of the IFest, and taught school; 1838, removed to Jacksonville; 1839, settled
in Winchester, Scott County; served as county clerk and read law during term in
that office; admitted to the bar; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
1850-1852, representative in General Assembly, i860, delegate to Republican
National Convention; 1862, delegate to Union State Convention; 1863-1865,
army paymaster with rank of major; 1865, appointed by President Johnson
collector of internal revenue; died October 4, 1 879, in Winchester; in politics a Whig,
later a Republican. United States Biographical Dictionary, IWmms Volume, 81 o-
811; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 361; Scott, Newspapers and Periodicals
of Illinois, 258; Illinois State Journal, September 25, 1862; Hollingsworth, A List
of the Members.

Knowlton, Lincoln B.: born (1804) 1813, in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts;
attended Union College, Schenectady, New York; studied law with Governor
"Honest John Davis" of Massachusetts; 1839, went to Peoria; known as one of
the most brilliant and prominent lawyers of his day, the Henry Clay of the Illinois
bar; 1844, delegate to Whig National Convention that nominated Clay; 1846,
unsuccessful candidate for state senator; 1847, member of Constitutional Conven-
tion; 1852, Free Soil candidate for governor; 1854, nominated for Congress;
intimate friend of Lincoln, David Davis, Stephen A. Douglas and other eminent
men of the early bar of Illinois; died 1854, in politics a Whig. Palmer, Bench and
Bar of Illinois, 1 1293-294; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
Peoria County, i-.i^^; K'lcc, Peoria, City and County, 1:368; Bateman and Selby,
Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Sangamon County, 2:673; Hollingsworth, A
List of the Members.

Knox, James: born July 4, 1807, i" Canajoharie, Montgomery County, New
York; 1827-1828, attended Hamilton College, New York; 1830, graduated from
Yale; 1833, admitted to the bar; 1836, came to Knoxville, Illinois; one of prime
movers in construction of Peoria and Oquawka Railroad and its first president;
1837, procured charter for Knox College at Galesburg; 1840, engaged in mercantile
business and continued for several years; 1847, member of Constitutional Con-
vention; 1853-1857, representative in Congress; 1857-1861, 1865-1869, 1872-
1873, visited in Berlin, seeking medical aid; liberal in his donations to various
collegiate institutions; died October (8) 9, 1876; in politics a Whig until 1854,

968 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

thereafter a Republican. Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 502; Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 192; Biographical Congressional Directory, 777^-/9//, p.
787; History of Knox County, Charles C. Chapman and Company, 686-687; Bate-
man and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Knox County, 873; HoUings-
worth, /^ List of the Members.

Kreider, George: born 1785, in Pennsylvania; 1835, came to Illinois; farmer
near EUisville, Fulton County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in
politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Lander, Samuel; born January 21, 1798, in Clark County, Kentucky; October,
1835, came to Bloomington, Illinois; farmer and stock-raiser; J 847, member of
Constitutional Convention; removed to Denison, Texas; died January 8, 1892;
in politics a Whig, later a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia
of Illinois, McLean County, 2:1147; Portrait and Biographical Album of McLean
County, Chapman Brothers, JsS-ysT, Duis, The Good Old Times in McLean
Coan/y, 318-320; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Lasater, James M.: born 1817, in Tennessee; 1820, brought to Illinois;
farmer near McLeansboro, Hamilton County; sheriff of county; 1847, member of
Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat. History of Gallatin, Saline,
Hamilton, Franklin, and IVilliamson Counties, 259-260; HoUingsworth, A List of
the Members.

Laughlin, William: born 1800, in Kentucky; 1832, came to lUinois; farmer
near MarceUine, Adams County; 1 840-1 842, representative in General Assembly;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1870, one of first vice-presidents of
Old Settlers' Association of Adams and Brown counties; in politics a Democrat.
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 354; History of Adams County, 399, 421;
Thompson, Illinois JVhigs before 1846, p. 144; HoUingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Lavely, William: 1847, justice of the peace; 1852, mayor of Springfield;
1853, defeated for county clerk; 1861, defeated for county treasurer; 1869, member
of Springfield Board of Trade; member of Masonic Order; in politics a Democrat.
Power, History of Springfield, 64, loi; History of Sangamon County, Inter-State
Publishing Company, 274-275, 566; Journal of the Convention, 1847, p. 6.

Lemon, George B.: born 1810, in Ohio; 1836, came to lUinois; farmer near
Marion, DeWitt County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1854-1857,
associate county judge; 1 861-1863, county supervisor; in poUtics a Whig. History
ofBeWitt County, 1:127-130, 134, 139, 432; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Lenley (Linley), Isaac: born 1807, in Kentucky; 1833, came to lUinois,
farmer near Astoria, Fulton County; 1 839-1 842, county commissioner; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1850-1852, representative in General
Assembly; 1854, county supervisor; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois,
1913-1914, p. 362; History of Fulton County, Charles C. Chapman and Company,
968, 988; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Lockwood, Samuel Drake: born August 2, 1789; at Poundridge, Westchester
County, New York; February, 1811, admitted to the bar at Batavia, New York;
January, 181 2, removed to Sempronius; there appointed justice of peace and
master in chancery; November, 1813, removed to Auburn; 1818, came to Illinois;

APPENDIX 969

settled at Carmi; 1821, prosecuting attorney; February 26, i8ai— December 28,

1822, attorney-general; December 18, 1822-April 2, 1823, secretary of state;

1823, receiver of public moneys at Edwardsville; agent of the first Board of Canal
Commissioners; January 19, 1825-November 3, 1848, judge of Supreme Court of
Illinois; 1828-1853, trustee of Illinois College, Jacksonville; 1829, removed to
Jacksonville, Morgan County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
1851-1874, state trustee of the Illinois Central Railroad; 1853, removed to Batavia,
Kane County; died April 23, 1874, at Batavia; in politics a Whig, later a Republi-
can. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 341-342; Palmer,
Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:22-23; 2:1094-1095; Biographical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, 398-399; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 140, 142, 210; Bateman
and SstXhy, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, St. Clair County, 2:703; HoUings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Logan, Stephen Trigg: born February 24, i8oo, in Franklin County, Kentucky;
1820, admitted to the bar; 1832, emigrated to Sangamon County, Illinois; 1833,
opened law office at Springfield; 1835-1837, circuit judge; 1839, elected circuit
judge but declined to serve; 1841-1844, partner of Abraham Lincoln; 1842-1848,
1854-1856, representative in General Assembly; 1848, defeated for representative
in Congress; 1855, nominated without his consent for judge of Supreme Court of
Illinois; 1 847, member of Constitutional Convention; i 860, delegate to Republican
National Convention; 1861, commissioned by Governor Yates to represent Illinois
in the Washington Peace Conference; retired to private life; 1872, presided over
Republican State Convention; died July 17, 1880, at Springfield; in politics a
Whig, later a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
343; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:166-172; Encyclopedia of Biography of
Illinois, 1:149-153; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 213-214, 356-357; 364;
Cole, The Era of the Civil JVar, 258, 298; History of Sangamon County, Inter-State
Publishing Company, 87-91; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Loudon, John Tineri: born 1819, in Illinois; farmer near Bainbridge, William-
son County; became prominent member of Marion bar; 1847, member of Con-
stitutional Convention; 1849-1856, circuit clerk; in politics a Whig. Erwin,
History of Williamson County, 235, 250; History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton,
Franklin, and Williamson Counties, 458, 470; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

McCallen, Andrew: born October 29, 1813, at Palmyra, Indiana; 1814,
brought to Illinois; 1843, came to Shawneetown (Elizabethtown); 1846, began
practice of law; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; August 17, 1849—
May 3, 1853, register of land office at Shawneetown; successful criminal lawyer;
died February 10, 1861 at Shawneetown; in poUtics a Whig. Palmer, Bench and
Bar of Illinois, 2: 857; History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton, Franklin and William-
son Counties, 112; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

McClure, William: born 1807, in Pennsylvania; 1844, came to Illinois;
farmer near Joliet, Will County; in politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List
of the Members.

McCuUey, John: born 1799, in North Carolina; 1816, came to Illinois;
farmer near Belleville, St. Clair County; in politics a Democrat. HoUings-
worth, A List of the Members.

970 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

McHatton, Alexander: born 1787, in Kentucky; 1832, came to Illinois;
farmer near Camden, Schuyler County; in politics a Democrat. Hollingsworth,
/i List of the Memiers.

Manly, Uri: born 1807, in Massachusetts; 1832, came to Illinois; lawyer at
Marshall, Clark County; 1 834-1 836, 1 852-1 854, representative in General Assem-
bly; 1 835-1 843, county judge of Clark County; first postmaster of Marshall;
1 837-1 842, clerk of circuit and county commissioners' courts; 1847, member of
Constitutional Convention; 1847, one of board of commissioners for disbursement
of military fund; 1 848-1 850, state senator; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book
0/ Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 350, 360, 363; Thompson, Illinois IVhigs before 1846,
p. I45; Perrin, History of Crawford and Clark Counties, 51, 256, 259, 289, 303;
French Manuscripts, McKendree College Library, Lebanon, Illinois. Hollings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Markley, David: born 1791, in Pennsylvania; colonel in War of 1812; county
judge in Champaign County, Ohio; 1835 (1836), came to Illinois; 1836-1839,
engaged in mercantile business in Canton, Fulton County; 1837, president of first
Board of Trustees of Canton; 1838-1850, state senator; 1844, removed to farm
near Monterey in Banner Township; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
1850, county supervisor; 1856, removed to Nebraska; soon returned to Illinois,
settling in Stark County; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-
1914, pp. 352, 354-355, 357-358, 360; Greene and Thompson, Governors' Letter-
Books, 1840-1853, p. I04n; History of Fulton County, Charles C. Chapman and
Company, 476, 523-524, 527-528, 987; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Marshall, Franklin S. D.: born 1819, in Kentucky; i83i,came to Cass County,
Illinois; removed to Bath, Mason County, where he practiced law; 1 845-1 848,
circuit clerk; 1853, first master in chancery; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention; died, 1854 (1855); in politics a Whig. History of Menard and Mason
Counties, 435, 437-438, 568; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Marshall, Thomas A.: born 181 8, in Kentucky; 1839, came to Illinois; lawyer
at Charleston, Coles County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1858-
1862, state senator; i860, delegate to Republican National Convention; 1861,
president pro tem of Senate and acting lieutenant-governor; 1861-1862, colonel
of First Illinois Cavalry; in politics a Whig, later a Republican. Moses, History of
Illinois, 1205, 1225; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 139, 365-366, 391;
Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1 13; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Mason, John West: born 1806, in New York; 1833, came to Illinois; 1836, in
first Kane County election, unsuccessful candidate for representative in General
Assembly; 1838, though he carried his own county, defeated by William Stadden
in election for state senator; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; farmer
near Newark, Kendall County, in 1847; 1 850-1 854, one of editors of Lacon Herald;
in politics a Whig, thereafter a Democrat. Scott, Newspapers and Periodicals of
Illinois, 217; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 352; Past and Present of
Kane County, 244, 248; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Matheny, James H.: born October 30, 1818, in St. Clair County, Illinois;
1821, brought by his parents to Springfield, where he afterward resided; 1839,
appointed deputy clerk of the Supreme Court and served for a time; 1 843, admitted

APPENDIX 971

to the bar; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1852-1856, clerk of
circuit court; October, 1862, commissioned lieutenant-colonel of One Hundred
Fourteenth (One Hundred Thirtieth) Illinois Volunteers; after siege of Vicksburg
served as judge-advocate until July, 1864, when he resigned and resumed the
practice of law; 1 873-1 890, county judge of Sangamon County; in poUtics a Whig,
acted for a short time with the American and Republican parties, thereafter a
Democrat; died September 7, 1890. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia
of Illinois, 356; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:191-192; Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 432; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Mieure, John: born 1800, in Virginia; 1824, came to Lawrence County,
Illinois, and established business as dry-goods merchant in Lawrenceville; later
became farmer near Lawrenceville; county commissioner; 1847, member of Con-
stitutional Convention; in politics a Whig; died June 3, 1849. Bateman and
Selby, Illinois Historical and Lawrence County Biographical, 719; Combined History
of Edwards, Lawrence and IFabash Counties, 108, no, 113; HoUingsworth, A List
of the Members.

Miller, Robert: born 1808, in Pennsylvania; 1835, came to Illinois; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; merchant in Warsaw, Hancock County;
in politics a Whig. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Minshall, William A.: born 1802, in Virginia; 1829, removed to Rushville,
Illinois, and took up practice of law; 1 832-1 834, 1 836-1 838, 1 840-1 842, representa-
tive in General Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1849-
1852, judge of the Circuit Court for the Fifth Circuit; died in office, November 5,
1852 (1853); in politics a Whig. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, 2J9; Pa\m£r, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:183-184; 2:876; Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 214,349,351, 355; Bateman and Selby, Historical Ency-
clopedia of Illinois, Schuyler County, 671, 677; Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, McDonough County, 649; HoUingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Moffett, Garner: born January, 1807, in Virginia; 1836, came to Illinois, and
began farming near Cherry Grove, Carroll County; 1839, one of first county
commissioners; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; county superin-
tendent of schools for many years; held many other offices; died October, 1856;
in politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
Carroll County, i:6i<), 631, -joi^; History of Carroll County, 'H. F. Kett and Com-
pany, 480; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Moore, Henry W.: born 1816; 1840, removed to Illinois; lawyer at
Equality, Gallatin County; 1845, prosecuting attorney for circuit; 1846-1848,
secretary of Senate; 1847, secretary of Constitutional Convention; in politics a
Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 358; History of Marion and
Clinton Counties, 95; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Moore, William S. (George S. Moore in roll of Convention): born 1807, in
Delaware; 1836, came to Illinois; farmer near Carthage, Hancock County; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth,
A List of the Members.

Morris, Richard G.: born 1800, in Virginia; 1833, came to Illinois; farmer

972 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

near Hutsonville, Crawford County; 1844-1846, 1848-1850, representative in
General Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1853-1855,
county judge; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 358,
360; Thompson, Illinois IFhigs ief ore 1846, p. 145; Pernn, History 0/ Crawford and
Clark Counties, part i, 50, 51; HoUingsworth, J List of the Members.

Nichols, Jacob M.: born 1806, in North Carolina; 1832, came to Illinois;
farmer near Payson, Adams County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Democrat. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Northcott, Benjamin F.: born 1817, in Kentucky; 1839, came to Illinois;
farmer near Athens, Menard County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
in politics a Whig. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Norton, Jesse Olds: born December 25, 1812, at Bennington, Vermont; 1835,
graduated from Williams College; 1839, settled at Joliet; taught school in Wheel-
ing, Virginia, and Potosi, Missouri; studied law at Potosi; 1840, admitted to the
bar and began the practice of law; (1845) city attorney; 1846-1850, county judge;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1850-1852, representative in General
Assembly; 1853-1857, 1863-1865, representative in Congress; 1857-1861, circuit
judge; 1866-1869, United States district attorney for the northern district in
Chicago; served as corporation council of Chicago; diedAugust3, 1875, in Chicago;
in politics a Whig, thereafter a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 405; Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 523-524
Encyclopedia of Biography of Illinois, 1 195-96; Bench and Bar of Chicago, 460-463;
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 192-193, 215, 362; Biographical Congressional
Directory, iy74-igii, pp. 893-894. HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Oliver, John: born 1798, in North Carolina; 1818, came to Illinois; farmer
near Vienna, Johnson County; 1834-1836, 1849-1842, representative in General
Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat.
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 350, 355; Thompson, Illinois IVhigs before
1846, p. I46; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Pace, George W.: born December 18, 1806 in Kentucky; 1822, came to
Jefferson County, Illinois; 1832, served in Black Hawk War; moved to farm near
Salem, Marion County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; later
engaged in furniture business, also a tailor for some time; died June 1, 1867; in
politics a Democrat. Wall, History of Jefferson County, 120, 241, 244; BrinkerhofF,
History of Marion County, 236; Biographical and Reminiscent History of Richland,
Clay and Marion Counties, 43; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Palmer, Reverend Henry D.: born April 19, (1791)1782, in Oland County,
North Carolina; 1783, taken by parents to Winsborough County, South Carolina;
from there in a few years to Wilson County, Tennessee; 1 809, ordained as a minister
of the Christian (Campbellite) church; collected colony and emigrated to Edwards
County, Illinois; 1818, moved to Indiana and founded a church near Carlyle;
1822-1824, represented Sullivan County in Indiana House of Representatives;
assisted in formation of first revised code for Indiana; 1835, again emigrated to
"Half Moon Prairie," MarshaU County, Illinois; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention; oldest member of Convention; 1859, deUvered last sermon; removed
to Eureka, Woodford County; in politics a Whig.

APPENDIX

973

Chicago Democrat,

August 17, 1847.
Springfield, August 10.

"The business of today and yesterday was opened by prayer by the Reverend
H. D. Palmer, a Delegate from the county of Marshall. (Mr. Palmer is a plain,
unassuming, honest man, by his acts here manifesting a strong desire to do that
which shall be for best interest of State. His age is 66. He has frequently been
called upon to serve as chaplain. His language is plain, words few and expressive,
manner unassuming, and he is listened to respectfully by all; and to many his
sincere, reverential and expressive prayer is more than acceptable.")

"Hack Driver."

Stale of Indiana Legislative Manual for 1913, pp. 249, 284; Ford, History of Putnam
and Marshall Counties, 155; HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Palmer, John McAuley: born September 13, 1817, in Scott County, Kentucky;
1818-18JI, resided with parents in Christian County, Kentucky; 1831, came to
Madison County, Illinois; 1 834, entered Shurtleff College at Upper Alton; Decem-
ber, 1 838— March, 1 839, taught school and studied law; December, 1 839, admitted
to the bar and began practice of law at Carlinville; 1843-1847, 1848, probate judge
of Macoupin County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1849-1851,
county judge; 1852-1856 state senator; 1856, president of the first Republican
State Convention; 1856, delegate to Republican National Convention; 1859 ('1858)
defeated for Congress; i860, Republican presidential elector; 1 861, member of
Washington Peace Conference; May, 1861, commissioned colonel of the Fourteenth
Illinois Volunteer Infantry; November, 1861, advanced to rank of brigadier-
general; later major-general; September, 1866, resigned from military service;
1867, removed to Springfield; 1 869-1 873, governor of Illinois; three times un-
successful Democratic candidate for United States Senate; (1877, 1883), 1884,
delegate to Democratic National Convention; 1888, unsuccessful candidate for
governor; 1891-1897, United States senator; 1896, candidate of National (Gold)
Democrats for president; last years spent in writing personal recollections; died
September 25, 1900; in politics a Democrat till 1856, a Republican till 1872,
thereafter a Democrat. Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:429-441; Bateman
and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 412; United States Biographical
Dictionary, Illinois Volume, 7-8; Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 56-57;
Encyclopedia of Biography of Illinois, 'i-.^o-j-upcj; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
pp. 138, 201, 361-363; Biographical Congressional Directory, 1774-igii, p. 906;
HoUingsworth, A List of the Members.

Peters, Onslow: born 1805, in Massachusetts; graduate of Brown University;
admitted to the bar; 1837, settled at Peoria, Illinois; 1840, one of first vice-presi-
dents of Illinois State Educational Society; 1847, member of Constitutional Con-
vention; first president of Peoria County Educational Society; 1853-1856, judge
of the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit; died in office, February 28, 1856, at Washington,
D. C; in politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, ^zi; VaXmtr, Bench and Bar of Illinois,!: 306; Biographical Encyclopedia
of Illinois, 360; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 215; Bateman and Selby,

974 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Peoria County, 2:115-116, 134-135; Hollings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Pinckney, Reverend Daniel J.: born 1817, in New York; professor in the
Genesee Wesleyan Seminary; 1842, came to Illinois; 1 842-1 845, 1 846-1 847, 1850-
1855, principal of Rock River Seminary (Mt. Morris); 1842-1858, member of
Board of Trustees of Rock River Seminary; 1847, member of Constitutional Con-
vention; 1850-1851, editor ot Ml. Morris Gazette; 1854-1858, 1 864-1 866, repre-
sentative in General Assembly; 1 866-1 870, state senator; 1 876-1 877, editor of
Mt. Morris Independent; last years spent on farm near Mt. Morris; in politics a
Whig, later a Republican. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 364-365, 369-371;
Scott, Newspapers and Periodicals of Illinois, 252-253; History of Ogle County,
H. F. Kett and Company, 475-477; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Powers, William B.: born 181 1, in New Hampshire; 1838, came to Illinois;
mechanic at Quincy, Adams County; in politics a Democrat. History of Adams
County, 399; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Pratt, O. C: born April 24, 1819, in Ontario County, New York; 1837-1839,
attended West Point, but resigned in order to complete study of law; 1840, ad-
mitted to the bar in New York; 1843, '^^me to Galena, Illinois; lawyer at Galena,
Jo Daviess County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1848, crossed
plains to Santa Fe, thence to California in service of government; 1848, became
associate justice of Supreme Court of Oregon; United States district judge for
Territory of Oregon, later lieutenant-governor of Oregon; 1856, removed to San
Francisco and engaged in private practice; 1859, elected judge of Twelfth Judicial
District of California; died in Oregon; in politics a Democrat. PaXmer, Bench and
Bar of Illinois, 1:514; The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, 24:223n.; 30:70,
loin, 102, 159, 162, 164, l67n; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Reynolds, Harmon G.: born December 21, 1810, at Moreau, Saratoga County,
New York; reared in Berlin, Washington County, Vermont; 1837, admitted to
the bar at Montpelier, Vermont; 1837, came to Rock Island, Illinois; taught
school in Rock Island and Hampton; 1838, elected magistrate in Hampton;
1839-1847, probate justice; 1844-1846, editor of Upper Mississippian of Rock
Island County; 1847-1849, postmaster of Rock Island; 1847, assistant secretary
of Constitutional Convention; 1849, 1861, assistant clerk of House of Representa-
tives; 1850, removed to Cambridge, Henry County; 1850-1854, state's attorney;
1851, removed to Knoxville; 1853-1857, county judge of Knox County; 1854,
appointed postmaster of Knoxville; 1858, removed to Springfield; 1862 (1875)
editor o( Masonic Travel; 1866-1867, editor of Odd Fellows' Union; removed to
Blue Rapids, Marshall County, Kansas, where he spent remainder of his life; in
politics a Democrat. Scott, Newspapers and Periodicals of Illinois, 302, 325;
Portrait and Biographical Album of Rock Island County, 711, 747; Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Rock Island County, 1:644, 709-710,
712,735; 2:971; History of Knox County, Cha.rks C. Chapman and Company,
456, 464; Power, History of Springfield, 85-86; Hollingsworth, A List of the Mem-
bers.

Rives, George W.: born 1815, in Virginia; 1842, came to Illinois; farmer
near Paris, Edgar County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1848-1850,

APPENDIX 975

1 870-1 872, representative in General Assembly; in politics a Whig, later a Demo-
crat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 360, 373; Rummel's Illinois Hand-Book
and Legislative Manual for i8ji, p. 181; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Robbins, Ezekiel Wright: born 1803, in New York; 1841, came to Illinois;
farmer near Chester, Randolph County; 1844-1846, representative in General
Assembly; 1847, member of the Constitutional Convention; county surveyor; in
politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 358; History of Randolph,
Monroe, and Perry Counties, 124-126; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Robinson, Benaiah: born 1797, in North Carolina; 1809, came to Illinois;
farmer near Edwardsville, Madison County; i837-(i849) surveyor of Madison
County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; removed to Oregon; in
politics a Democrat. History of Madison County, 149-150, 154, 168, 348; Hollings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Roman, William W.: born 1806, in Kentucky; 1829, came to Illinois; physi-
cian at Lebanon, St. Clair County; master in chancery; 1838-1840, 1856-1858,
representative in General Assembly; 1842, defeated for reelection by Gustave
Koerner; 1851, 1854-1862, physician to the poor house; 1857-1861, county clerk;
died in office September, 1861; in politics a Democrat till 1842, thereafter a Whig.
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 353, 365; Memoirs of Gustave Koerner, 1:464;
Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, St. Clair County, 2:690,
(>9S> 834; History of St. Clair County, Brink, McDonough and Company, 77-79;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Rountree, Hiram: born December 22, 1794, in Rutherford County, North
Carolina; brought in infancy to Kentucky; in War of 18 12, ensign under General
Shelby, first governor of Kentucky; studied law in Bowling Green, Kentucky;
1817, came to Madison County, Illinois; 1817-1821, taught school near Edwards-
ville; 1 8 19, removed to Vandalia, Fayette County; 1821, removed to Hillsboro,
Montgomery County; one of commissioners to organize the county; held the
following offices: first clerk of county commissioners court, first clerk of the circuit
court, first county recorder, justice of the peace, notary public, master in chan-
cery, judge of probate, and postmaster of Hillsboro; 1 826-1 832, enrolling and
engrossing clerk of the House of Representatives; 1832, captain in Black Hawk
War; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1848-1852, state senator;
1852-1869, county judge; died March 4, 1873, at Hillsboro; in politics a Democrat,
later a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 460;
Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 2:96s-96y; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
pp. 346, 348, 360-361; Perrin, History of Bond and Montgomery Counties, part i,
pp. 187, 206, 216, 222, 229, 245, 391; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Scates, Walter Bennett: born January 18, 1808, in South Boston, Halifax
County, Virginia; taken in infancy to a farm near Hopkinsville, Kentucky, where
until nineteen years of age, he worked with his father and attended school during
the winters; learned printer's trade at Nashville; studied law at Louisville in the
office of Charles S. Morehead, later governor of Kentucky; 1831, admitted to the
bar and removed to Frankfort, Franklin County, Illinois; county surveyor for a
time; .'^pril, 1831, April, 1832, April, 1833, October, 1833, April, 1834, October,
1834, State's attorney pro tem; January 18, 1 836— December 26, 1836, attorney-

976 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

general; lived at Vandalia, then the state capital, during that time; December 26,
1836 — February 15, 1841, circuit judge residing at Shawneetown; 184I, removed to
Mt. Vernon; February 15, 1841— January 11, 1847, June 6, 1853 — June ^8, 1857,
judge of supreme court; 1855-1857, chief justice; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention, where he served as chairman of the Committee on Judiciary; 1849-
1853, engaged in mining and railroad enterprises; 1857, resumed practice of law
in Chicago; 1862, volunteered in the army, commissioned major, and assigned to
staff of General McClernand; was made assistant adjutant-general, mustered out
in January, 1866, and afterwards brevetted lieutenant-colonel, colonel, and briga-
dier-general; July, 1866 — ^July, 1869, collector of customs and ex officio custodian
of United States funds at Chicago; in politics a Democrat; died October 26, 1886,
at Evanston. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 466-467;
United States Biographical Dictionary, Illinois Volume, 690-692; Palmer, Bench
and Bar of Illinois, 1:35-36; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 142, 210, 214;
Combined History of Randolph, Monroe and Perry Counties, 180; Hollingsworth, A
List of the Members.

Servant, Richard B.: born 1803, in Virginia; 1831, emigrated to Randolph
County, Illinois; settled at Chester; 1835, first president of Board of Trustees of
Chester; 1835-1840, state senator; 1843-1845, receiver of public moneys at land
ofSce at Kaskaskia; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; during periods
1849-1874, served several terms as judge of County Court of Randolph County;
1855-1857, probate judge; in politics a Whig, later a Democrat. Combined History
of Randolph, Monroe and Perry Counties, 118, 121, 124-126, 286-287, 289, 309;
Blue Book of Illinois 1913-1914, pp. 349, 351-352; Hollingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Sharp (Sharpe), Thomas C: born 1818, in New Jersey; 1834, came to Illinois;
lawyer at Warsaw, Hancock County; 1841-1843, 1844-1847, editor of Warsaw
Signal; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1853-1855, editor of Warsaw
Express; 1864-1865, editor of Hancock New Era; in politics a Democrat (Whig),
later a Republican. Scott, Newspapers and Periodicals of Illinois, 348-349;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Sherman, Francis Cornwall; born September 18, 1805, in Newton, Connecti-
cut; April 7, 1834, arrived in Chicago; engaged principally in brick-making and
building; 1835-1836, member of Board of Trustees of Chicago; 1837, one of first
aldermen; 1840-1845, county commissioner; 1841, 1862-1865, mayor of Chicago;
J 844-1 850, representative in General Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention; 1851-1853, chairman of Board of Supervisors; 1856, 1865-1867,
unsuccessful candidate for mayor; 1862, defeated in congressional election; died
November 7, 1870; in politics a Democrat. Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
423; Currey, Chicago, Its History and Builders, 5:148-154; Andreas, History of
Cook County, 34S, 3S7; Moses, History of Chicago, 1:96, 103, 114-116, 133, 137-
138; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 358-359. 361; Hollingsworth, A List of
the Members.

Shields, William: born 1812, in Tennessee; 1827, came to Illinois; farmer
near Paris, Edgar County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1852-

APPENDIX 977

i8j4, representative in General Assembly; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 363; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Shumway, Dorice Dwight: born September 28, 1813, at Williamsburg,
Massachusetts; 1834, went to Zanesville, Ohio; 1837, removed to Montgomery
County, Illinois, where he engaged in the mercantile business; June 3, 1841,
married daughter of Hiram Rountree; county commissioner of Montgomery
County; 1843, removed to farm near Taylorville, Christian County; 1846-1848,
representative in General Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
1851-1858, merchant in Taylorville; major of state militia; 1857-1861, county
judge of Christian County; 1857-1870, master in chancery; i860, admitted to the
bar and formed law partnership with H. M. Vandeveer; died May 9, 1870; in
politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
480; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 359; History of Christian County, 64-65,
68, 116, 124; Mc^ndt, Past and Present of Christian County, 53,372-373; Hollings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Sibley, John: born 1792, in Massachusetts; 1841, came to Illinois; farmer
near Richmond, McHenry County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
1853, 1855-1857, county supervisor. History of McHenry County, Inter-State
Publishing Company, 219, 223; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Sim, William: born 1795, in Aberdeen, Scotland; 1817, came to America;
(1817) 1818, came to Illinois; first physician to settle at Golconda, Pope County;
1824-1828, representative in General Assembly; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention; died (1858) 1868; in politics a Whig. Bateman and Selby, //u/or/Va/
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 480-48 1 ; Biographical Review of Johnson, Massac, Pope
and Hardin Counties, 287-288; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 345-346;
Page, History of Massac County, 48, 152-153; Hollingsworth, /^Z,ij/o/Mf Members.

Simpson, Lewis J.: born 1793, in Kentucky; 1807, came to Illinois; farmer
near Liberty, Highland (now Adams) County; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention; in politics a Democrat. Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Singleton, James Washington: born November 23, 181 1, in Paxton, Virginia;
educated at the Winchester Academy; 1829, removed to Indiana; (1830), settled
in Schuyler County, Illinois, where he practiced medicine and studied law; 1833,
came to Mt. Sterling, Brown County; lawyer and stock-raiser; 1844, elected
brigadier-general of the Illinois militia and identified with the "Mormon War";
1847, 1862, member of Constitutional Convention; 1850-1854, 1860-1862, repre-
sentative in General Assembly; 1852, removed to Quincy, Adams County; con-
spicuous leader of peace party during the Civil War; 1868, defeated as candidate
for Congress; 1879-1883, representative in Congress; 1882, defeated for reelection
as Independent Democrat; constructed the Quincy and Toledo (now part of the
Wabash, and the Quincy, Alton and St. Louis (now part of the Chicago, Burlington
& Quincy) railways, president of both companies; died April 4, 1892, at Baltimore,
Maryland; in politics a Whig, later a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 4S1; Paimer, Bench an3 Bar of Illinois, 1:2-3; Bio-
graphical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 484; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 195,
362-363, 367; Redmond, History of Quincy and Its Men of Mark, 285-287; Bio-

978 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

graphical Congressional Directory, 1774-igil, p. 999; Hollingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Smith, Edward O.: born (18 17) 1818, in Montgomery County, Maryland;
1837, came to Illinois; mechanic at Decatur, Macon County; 1847, member of
Constitutional Convention; 1848-1850, state senator; 1853, renioved to California,
where he became farmer and trader near San Jose; 1878, member of California
Constitutional Convention; in politics a Whig. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
p. 360; The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, 24:404; Hollingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Smith, Jacob: born 1812, in Pennsylvania; 1839, came to Illinois; physician
at Galatia, Gallatin County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in
politics a Democrat. Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Spencer, John Winchell: born July 25, 1801, at Vergennes, Vermont; 1820,
came to St. Louis, but on account of slavery in Missouri removed to Greene County,
Illinois; 1820-1827, farmer in Greene County; 1828, removed to Morgan County;
1829, removed to farm near Rock Island; 1831, first lieutenant in Black Hawk
War; 1833-1838, county commissioner of Rock Island County; 1841, erected a
dam at Moline; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1849-1852, county
judge; 1852, became chief proprietor and manager of ferry between Rock Island
and Davenport; died February 20, 1878; in politics a Whig. Biographical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 295-296; Portrait and Biographical Album of Rock Island
County, 545-546, 704; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Stadden, William: born December 5, 1800, near Newark, Ohio; 1831, came
to LaSalle County; millwright by trade; 1834-1836, sheriff of LaSalle County;
1836-1843, state senator; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; died
October 13,1849; in politics a Whig. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1^14, pp. 3Si-
35->354; Thompson, Illinois l-Fhigs before 1846, p. 136; History of LaSalle County,
Inter-State Publishing Company, 1:217; 2:101; Baldwin, History of LaSalle
County, 216, 221, 271-272; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Swan, Hurlbut: born, June 9, 1797, in Lime, Connecticut; 1845, came to Lake
County, Illinois; farmer in Fremont Township, near Libertyville; 1847, member
of Constitutional Convention; 1850-1852, 1859-1860, 1868, county supervisor,
1868, chairman; 1850-1852, 1854-1856, representative in General Assembly;
1861, township assessor; died May 15, 1876; in politics a Whig till 1850, then
became a Free Soiler, later a Republican. Halsey, History of Lake County, 38, 93,
no, 117, 121-122, 135, 436-438, 441, 603-604, 809, 822; Blue Book of Illinois,
1913-1914, pp. 362, 364; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Thomas, William: born November 22, 1802, in Warren (now Allen) County,
Kentucky; 1820-1822, deputy sheriff of Allen County; studied law at Bowling
Green in office of James T. Morehead, afterward governor of Kentucky; 1823,
admitted to the bar; 1823-1826, practiced law in Bowling Green; 1826, removed to
Jacksonville, Illinois; taught school; 1827, private in Winnebago War; 1828-
1829, reporter for Vandalia Intelligencer; 1828-1829, state's attorney for Fifth
Judicial Circuit; 1831-1832, quartermaster and commissary in Black Hawk War;
1831-1835, school commissioner of Morgan County; 1834-1839, state senator;
1839-1841, circuit judge; 1846-1848, 1850-1852, representative in General Assem-

APPENDIX 979

bly; 1839-1869, trustee of the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb at Jacksonville;
1847, one of first trustees of the Hospital for the Insane at Jacksonville; 1847,
member of Constitutional Convention; 1861, member of Board of Army Auditors;
1869, appointed by Governor Palmer a member of State Board of Public Charities,
but resigned because of poor health; died, August 22, 1889, at Jacksonville; in
politics a Whig, later a Republican; interested in the state institutions at Jackson-
ville, also in education; taught school after his removal to Illinois, and was one of
founders and supporters of IlHnois Female College. Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 522; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:337; 2:1095;
United Stales Biographical Dictionary, Illinois Volume, 827-830; Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 213, 259, 261, 349, 351-352; Eames, Historic Morgan and
Classic Jacksonville, 123, 127, 243, 323-326; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Thompson, William W.: born February 23, 1786, at Brimfield, Massachusetts;
1826, removed to Northampton, Massachusetts; member of Massachusetts legis-
lature; 1839, moved to Peoria County, Illinois; 1 842-1 846, state senator; 1844,
prominent in educational convention at Peoria; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention; died February 24, 1850, at Brimfield, Peoria County; a farmer; in
politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, His.'orical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
Peoria CoKnty, 2:46g; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 355, 357; Hollings-
worth, A List of the Members.

Thornton, Anthony: born November g, 18 14 (1817), near Paris, Bourbon
County, Kentucky; 1831-1833, attended high school at Gallatin, Tennessee, and
Center College, Danville, Kentucky; 1834, graduated from Miami University,
Ohio; 1836, admitted to the bar; 1836 (1838), settled at Shelbyville, Illinois, where
he began practice of law; 1847, 1862, member of Constitutional Convention;
1850-1852, representative in the General Assembly; 1865-1867, representative
in Congress; 1870-1873, judge of Supreme Court of Illinois; 1873, first president
of State Bar Association; 1 879, removed to Decatur; 1 88 1, returned to Shelbyville;
died September 10, 1904; in politics a Whig, then a Democrat; (later a Repub-
lican). Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 522; Palmer,
Bench and Bar of Illinois, i: 458-459; Biographical Congressional Directory, 1774-
igil, p. 1055; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-19I4, pp. 193, 210, 362; Bateman and
Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Shelby County, 2:686, 689, 729-730,
775; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Trower, Thomas B.: born November 15, 1806 (1809), in Albemarle County,
Virginia; taken in infancy to Kentucky; (1826-1829), studied medicine and taught
school; 1S30, removed to Shelbyville, Illinois; 1830-1836, engaged in practice of
medicine at Shelby-ville; 1836, removed to Charleston, Coles County, 1 834-1 836,
representative in General Assembly; I 839, resumed practice of medicine at Charles-
ton; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; president of Moultrie County
Bank; vice-president of First National Bank of Charleston; in politics a Democrat.
Biographical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 483-484; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914,
p. 350; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

TurnbuU, Gilbert: born 1800, in Tennessee; 1832, came to Warren County,
Illinois; later a farmer near Oquawka, Henderson County; 1834, school trustee;
1836, justice of the peace; 1837, school teacher; 1836-1843, county 1

98o ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

assessor of Warren County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1848-
1850, representative in General Assembly; in politics a Whig. Blue Book of
Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 360; Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois,
Warren County, 2:738, 753; Portrait and Biographical Album of Wttrren County,
Chapman Brothers, 708; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Turner, Oaks: born 1809, in Maine; 1834, came to Illinois; 1834-1848, county
clerk of Putnam County; 1838-1847, circuit clerk; 1839-1847, county recorder;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; 1848-1849, 1855-1859, county
treasurer; in politics a Whig. Ford, History of Putnam and Marshall Counties,
148; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Tutt, William: born 181 1, in Virginia; physician; 1 830, came to York, Clark
County, Illinois; practiced medicine; 1838, removed to Marshall; 1847, member of
Constitutional Convention; in politics a Democrat. Perrin, History of Crawford
and Clark Counties, part 2, pp. 294, 303, 344. Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Tuttle, James: born 1806, in Ohio; 1840, came to Illinois; farmer near
Waynesville, DeWitt County; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; in
politics a Whig. Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Vance, John W.: born 1782 in Germany; in (1822) emigrated to the United
States; brother of Governor Joseph Vance of Ohio; 1823, came from Ohio to
Danville, Vermilion County, Illinois; 1823 (1824), leased and developed salt works;
very prominent in affairs of county at an early day; 1832-1838, state senator;
1847, member of Constitutional Convention; died 1856 (1857); in politics a Whig.
Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 348-349, 351; Jones, History of Vermilion
County, 1:137, 4°5; 2:113; Beckwith, History of Vermilion County, 970-971;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Vernor, Zenas H.: born 1808, in North Carolina; 1829, came to Illinois;
farmer near Nashville, Washington County; 1847, member of Constitutional
Convention; 1848-1850, representative in General Assembly; in politics a Demo-
crat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, p. 360; Hollingsworth, A List of the Mem-
bers.

Wead, Hezekiah Morse: born June i, 1810, in Sheldon, Franklin County,
Vermont; attended winter term of village school until seventeen years old; for
six months attended academy at Castleton, Vermont; clerk for merchant in West
Rutland, Vermont; worked passage on canalboat to Pittsford, New York, where
he taught school and began study of law; 1832, admitted to the bar; taught school
in Akron, Ohio; 1836-1837, practiced law in Vermont in partnership with General
Seth Cushman; 1837-1840, taught school in New Jersey; 1840, came to Lewistown,
Fulton County, Illinois; 1845, aided in preparation of memorial to General Assem-
bly on common-school education; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
1852-1855, circuit judge of Tenth Circuit; 1855, removed to Peoria, where he had
successful career as a lawyer; i86i, moved to farm near Peoria; died May 10, 1876;
in politics a Democrat; allied himself with Anti-Repudiationists; opposed secession
and supported government in war, but continued allegiance to Democratic party.
VaXmtr, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:4,310,315-320; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-
1914, p. 215; History of Fulton County, Charles C. Chapman and Company, 406;

APPENDIX 981

Batemnn andSelhy, Historical Encyclopedia 0/ I/linois, Peoria County, 1: 635; Rice,
History 0/ Peoria, 2:171-172; Hollingsworth, J List oj the Members.

Webber, Thomson (Thompson) R.: born October 6, 1807, in Shelby County,
Kentucky; 1824-1832, taught school; 1832, came to Illinois; 1 834-1 837, engaged
in mercantile business in Urbana; first postmaster in Urbana, appointed by Jack-
son, served for fifteen years; 1833-1853, clerk of county court; 1833-1846, clerk of
circuit court; 1834-1874, master in chancery; 1847, 1862, member of Constitu-
tional Convention; close friend of Lincoln and David Davis; died December 14,
1881; in politics a Democrat. Biop-aphical Encyclopedia oJ Illinois, no-iii;
Bateman a.nASt\hy, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, Champaign County, 2:669,
736,764, 1050; Portrait and Biographical Album of Champaign County, Chapman
Brothers, 946; History of Champaign County, Brink, McDonough and Company,
31, 33, 108; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

West, Edward M.: born May 2, 1814, in Botetourt County, Virginia; 1818,
brought to Illinois; 1829-1831, clerk in recorder's office and deputy postmaster at
Springfield; 1833-1835, clerk in United States land office at Edwardsville; 1835-
(1854) 1867, engaged in mercantile business at Edwardsville; 1839-1845, county
treasurer; 1 845-1 851, county school commissioner; captain in Illinois National
Guard; 1861, member of committee to manage war fund; 1847, member of Con-
stitutional Convention; (1858) 1 867-1 887, engaged in banking; active and promi-
nent member of Methodist church; died October 31, 1887, in politics a Whig,
later a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 583;
History of Madison County, 150, 152-154, 168, 170, 172, 180, 338, 356-357, 556;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Whiteside, John Davis: born 1794 (1795) (1798), at Whiteside Station, Mon-
roe County, Illinois; farmer; 1 824-1 828, county commissioner; 1825-1828, clerk
of Circuit Court; 1830-1836, 1844-1846, representative in General Assembly; 1836,
presidential elector; 1836-1837, state senator; March 4, 1837-March 6, 1841,
state treasurer; 1842, second to General Shields in Lincoln-Shields duel; appointed
by President Polk as commissioner to confer with British government regarding
Illinois bonds; 1846, adjutant-general, organizing and training volunteers in
Mexican War; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention; died 1850, at place
of birth; in politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical Encyclopedia of
Illinois, 139, 586; Greene and Thompson, Governors' Letter-Books, 1840-1853, p.
I26n; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 141, 201, 348-351, 358; Combined
History of Randolph, Monroe and Perry Counties, 160-161, 449; Hollingsworth,
A List of the Members.

Whitney, Daniel Hilton: born 1808, in New York; 1834, came to Illinois;
physician at Belvidere, Boone County; 1836, first census enumerator of Winnebago
County; 1836-1837, recorder of Winnebago County; 1840, favored Wisconsin's
annexation of disputed territory; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
died February 17, (1862), 1864, at Belvidere; in pohtics a Whig. History of
Winnebago County, H. F. Kett and Company, 239-240, 244-245, 391-392, 404;
Church, History of Rockford and Winnebago County, 53-54. 75-76. '63, 202, 264;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

982 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Williams, Archibald: born June lo, 1801, in Montgomery County, Kentucky;
1828, admitted to the bar in Tennessee; 1829, removed to Quincy, Illinois; 1832-
1836, state senator; 1837-1840, representative in General Assembly; 1847, mem-
ber of Constitutional Convention; 1 849-1 853, United States district attorney for
the Southern District of Illinois; twice nominated by Whigs for United States
Senate; 1854, defeated as candidate for Congress; because of advanced age,
declined seat on United States Supreme Bench; 1861, appointed United States
district judge for Kansas; died September 21, 1863, at Quincy; in politics a Whig,
later a Republican. Bateman and Selby, Hislorical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 590;
Palmer, Bench and Bar 0/ Illinois, 1:2, iS2-iS2i 2: %%o; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-
1914, pp. 348-349, 352-353; History of Adams County, 415, 421; Thompson,
Illinois Whigs before 1S46, p. 149; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Wilson, John A.: born 1 8 19; 1820, brought to Shawneetown, Illinois; 1840,
removed to McLeansboro, for three terms sheriff of Hamilton County; 1 846-1 848,
doorkeeper of the House; 1847, doorkeeper pro tern and sergeant-at-arms of Con-
stitutional Convention; 1852-1854, 1856-1858, representative in General Assembly;
died in i86i; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 359,
363, 365; History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton, Franklin, and Williamson Counties,
260-261, 302, 753; Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

Witt, Franklin: born 1804, in Tennessee; 1 8 14, brought to Pope County,
Illinois; 1826, settled in Cass County; 1827, removed to farm near Kane, Greene
County; justice of the peace; 1836-1838, representative in General Assembly;
1838-1842, 1848-1851, state senator; 1847, member of Constitutional Convention;
died 1851; in politics a Democrat. Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 352, 354,
360-361 ; History of Greene County, 765-766; History of Greene and Jersey Counties,
672, 789; Miner, Past and Present of Greene County, 308; Hollingsworth, A List of
the Members.

Woodruff, Ralph: born 1806, in New York; 1834, came to Illinois; farmer
nearOttawa; March-August, 1839, county commissioner of LaSalle County; 1839,
one of commissioners to locate county seat of DuPage County; 1842, assessor;
1847, assistant doorkeeper of Constitutional Convention; died 1850; in politics a
Democrat. ^sXAvim, History of LaSalle County, 21s, 2i-], 233; History of LaSalle
Cottw/y, Inter-State Publishing Company, 1:216; Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, DuPage County, 2:640; Hollingsworth, A List of the
Members.

Woodson, David Meade: born May 18, 1806, in Jessamine County, Ken-
tucky; educated in private schools and at Transylvania University, and read law
with his father; 1832, member of Kentucky legislature; 1834, removed to Carroll-
ton, Greene County, Illinois; 1835, returned to Transylvania University and
graduated with honor; 1837-1839, county judge; 1839-1840, state's attorney;
1843, Whig candidate for Congress against Stephen A. Douglas; 1847, 1869-1870,
member of Constitutional Convention; November i, 1848 — December 4, 1848,
judge of the Supreme Court of Illinois; 1848, judge of the First Judicial Circuit;
died 1877; in politics a Whig, later a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 599; Palmer, Bench and Bar of Illinois, 1:4; 2:1095-
1096; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 210, 214, 355, 371; History of Greene

APPENDIX 983

andjeriey Counties, 601-502; Miner, Past and Present of Greene County, 61, 338-342;
Hollingsworth, A List 0/ the Members.

Worcester, Linus E.; born December 5, 1 811, in Windsor, Vermont; educated
in common schools of his native state, and at Chester Academy; 1836, came to
White Hall, Greene County, Illinois; 1836-1839, taught school; engaged succes-
sively in dry-goods, drug, farm implements, and lumber business; 1 843-1 848,
justice of the peace; 1 843-1 855, postmaster of White Hall; 1847, member of
Constitutional Convention; i852-(i885), township school trustee; 1853-1859,
associate county justice, 1856-1858, 1862-1866, state senator; 1859-1871, trustee
of the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb at Jacksonville; 1860-1891, one of the
directors of the Jacksonville branch of the Chicago and Alton Railroad; 1873-
1882, county judge; 1S76, delegate to Democratic National Convention; died
October 19th, 1891; in politics a Democrat. Bateman and Selby, Historical
Encyclopedia of Illinois, 599-600; Blue Book of Illinois, 1913-1914, pp. 364, 367-
368; Miner, Past and Present of Greene County, 60, 62-63, 266-267; History of
Greene and Jersey Counties, 591-592, 655-657, 660-661, 674-676, 685, 691, iioi;
Hollingsworth, A List of the Members.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

I
State Publications and Documents

Biue Book of the State of Illinois, 1913-1914. Compiled and published by Harry
Woods, secretary of state (Danville, 1914).

California Blue Book or State Rosier, 191 1. Compiled by Frank C. Jordan, secre-
tary of state .... (Sacramento, 1913).

Illinois Hand-Book of Information for the Year 1870, giving a general view of the State
of Illinois and its government .... Compiled by Edward Rummel, secretary
of state (Springfield, 1870).

James, Edmund J. (ed.). The Territorial Records of Illinois (Springfield, 1901)
(Illinois State Historical Library, Publications, number 3].

Journal of the Convention, Assembled at Springfield, fune 7, 1847, in Pursuance of an
Act of the General Assembly of the State of Illinois .... for the Purpose of
Altering, Amending, or Revising the Constitution of the State of Illinois (Spring-
field, 1847).

Journal of the House of Representatives of the Fifteenth General Assembly of the State
of Illinois .... 1846-1847 (Springfield, 1846).

Journal of the Senate of the Fifteenth General Assembly of the State of Illinois ....
1846-1847 (Springfield, 1846).

Laws of the State of Illinois .... 1846-1847 (Springfield, 1847).

Rummel, Edward, Rutnmel's Illinois Hand-Book and Legislative Manual for 1S71
.... (Springfield, 1871).

State of Indiana Legislative Manual for 1 91 3. . . . Compiled. ... by Demarchus
C. Brown, state librarian (Indianapolis, 1913).

Verlie, Emil J. (ed.), Illinois Constitutions (Springfield, 1919). [Collections of the
Illinois State Historical Library, volume 13].

Newspapers

Alton Telegraph and Democratic Review, 1847-1848, Alton.

Aurora Beacon, 1 847-1 848, Aurora.

Beardstown Gazette, 1847, Beardstown.

Belleville Advocate, 1 847-1 848, Belleville.

Chicago Daily Journal, 1847-1848, Chicago.

Chicago Democrat, 1846-1848, Chicago.

Illinois State Register, 1847-1848, Springfield.

Prairie Farmer, 1847-1848, Chicago.

^uincy Whig, 1848, Quincy.

987

988 ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Sangamo Journal, 1 847, Springfield, September 23, 1 847, the name became Illinois

Journal.
Stale Register, Tri-weekly, 1 847-1 848, Springfield.
fVestern Citizen, 1846-1848, Chicago.

Ill

Biographical Works

Bench and Bar oj Chicago, Biographical Sketches, American Biographical Publishing

Company (Chicago, n.d.).
Biographical Congressional Directory, with an outline history of the national congress,

1774-1911 .... Government Printing Office (Washington, 19 13).
Biographical Encyclopedia 0} Illinois oj the Nineteenth Century, Galaxy Publishing

Company (Philadelphia, 1875).
Caton, John D., Early Bench and Bar of Illinois .... (Chicago, 1893).
Encyclopedia of Biography of Illinois,The Century Publishing and Engraving Com-
pany, 2 volumes (Chicago, 1892).
French Manuscripts, letters to Augustus C. French in McKendree College Library,

Lebanon, Illinois.
Koerner, Gustave Phillip, Memoirs of Gustave Koemer, 1809-1896, life-sketches

written at the suggestion of his children. Edited by Thomas J. McCormack

.... (Cedar Rapids, 1909).
Lincoln, Abraham, The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, federal edition. Edited by

Arthur B. Lapsley, 8 volumes (New York, 1905-1906).
Nicolay, John G., and John Hay, Abraham Lincoln, a History, 10 volumes (New

York, 1890).
Nicolay, John G., and John Hay (ed.), Abraham Lincoln, Qomplete works, comprising

his speeches, letters, state papers, and miscellaneous writings, 2 volumes (New

York, 1894).
Palmer, John M., Personal Recollections of John M. Palmer, The story of an earnest

life (Cincinnati, 1901),
Palmer, John M., (ed.). The Bench and Bar of Illinois, historical and reminiscent, 2

volumes (Chicago, 1899).
Peck, John M., Forty Years of Pioneer Life, Memoir of John Mason Peck ....

Edited from his journals and correspondence by Rufus Babcock (Philadelphia,

1864).
Reynolds, John, My Own Times: Embracing also the History of my Life ....

(Chicago 1879).
Sturtevant, Julian M., Julian M. Sturtevant: An Autobiography, edited by J. M.

Sturtevant, Jr. (New York, 1896).
United States Biographical Dictionary and Portrait Gallery of Eminent and Self-made

Men, Illinois Volume, American Biographical Publishing Company (Chicago

1883).
White, Horace, The Life of Lyman Trumbull (Boston and New York, 1913).

BIBUOGRAPHY 989

Special Works

Anthony, Elliott, The Constitutional History of Illinois (Chicago, 1891).
Bancroft, Hubert Howe, The Works oj Hubert Howe Bancroft, volume 24, 39 volumes

(San Francisco, 1883-1890) [History of California, volume 7].
Cole, Arthur C, The Era of the Civil War (Springfield, 1919). [Centennial History

of Illinois, volume 3].
Cook, John Williston, Educational History of Illinois; growth and progress in educa-
tional afairs of the state from the earliest day to the present (Chicago, 1912).
Davidson, Alexander, and Bernard Stuve, A Complete History of Illinois from 1673

to 18S4 .... (Springfield, 1884).
Debel, Niels H., The Veto Power of the Governor of Illinois (Urbana, 1917) [University

of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, volume 6].
Dowrie, George W., The Development of Banking in Illinois, i8ij-i86j (Urbana,

1913) [University of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, volume 2].
Ford, Thomas, A History of Illinois from its commencement as a State in 1818 to 184.7,

containing a full account of the Black Hawk War, the rise, progress and fall of

Mormonism, the Alton and Lovejoy riots, and other .... events (Chicago,

1854).
Greene, Evarts B., and Clarence W. Alvord (ed.), Governors' Letter-Books 1818-

1834 (Springfield, 1909) [Collections of the Illinois State Historical Library,

volume 4].
Greene, Evarts B., and Charles M. Thompson, Governors' Letter-Books, 1840-1853

(Springfield, 191 1) [Collections of the Illinois State Historical Library, volume 7].
Greene, Evarts B., The Government of Illinois, its history and administration ....

(New York, 1904).
Harris, Norman D., History of Negro Slavery in Illinois and of the Slavery Agitation

in that State (Chicago, 1906). '

Moses, John, Illinois, Historical and Statistical, comprising the essential facts of its

growth as a Province, County, Territory and State, 2 volumes (Chicago, 1880).
Pease, Theodore C, The Frontier State (Springfield, 191 8) [Centennial History of

Illinois, volume 2].
Powell, Burt E., The Movement for Industrial Education and the Establishment of the

University, 1840-1870 (Urbana, 1918) [Semi-Centennial History of the University

of Illinois, volume i].
Scott, Franklin W., Newspapers and Periodicals of Illinois, 1814.-1879 (Springfield,

1910) [Collections of the Illinois Stale Historical Library, volume 6].
Stevenson, Adlai E., "The Constitutional Conventions and the Constitutions of

Illinois," Illinois State Historical Society, Transactions, 1903 (Springfield,

1904).
Thompson, Charles M., The Illinois Whigs Before 1846 (Urbana, 1915) [University

of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, volume 4].

990 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Local and County Histories

Andreas, A. T., History of Chicago from the earliest Period to the present Time, 3
volumes (Chicago, 1 884-1 886).

Andreas, A. T., History of Cook County, Illinois,from the earliest Period to the present
Time (Chicago, 1884).

Baldwin, Elmer, History of LaSalle County, Illinois, its topography, geology, botany,
natural history .... and a sketch of the pioneer settlers of each town to 184O,
with an appendix, giving the present status of the county . . . .(Chicago, 1877).

Bateman, Newton, and Paul Selby (ed.), Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois ....
(Chicago, 1900). Following the publication of the Encyclopedia as a single
volume, it was reissued in combination with histories of various counties, some-
times in a single enlarged volume, more frequently in sets of two volumes of
which the Encyclopedia constitutes the first, the county history the second.
The following histories of this series have been used in the preparation of this
volume:
History of Carroll County, Edited by Charles L.Hostetler [volume 2] (Chicago,

I9>3)-

History of Cass County, Edited by Charles A. E. Martin [volume 2] (Chicago,

I915).

History of Champaign County, Edited by Joseph O. Cunningham [volume 2]

(Chicago, 1905).

History of DuPage County .... by special authors and contributors [volume 2]

(Chicago, 1914)-

Historical Encyclopedia; History of Fulton County. Edited by Jesse Heylin

Chicago, 1908).

Illinois, Historical; Lawrence County, Biographical. Edited by John William

McCleave (Chicago, 1910).

Historical Encyclopedia; History of Kane County. Edited by John S. Wilcox

(Chicago, 1904).

History of Kendall County by special authors and contributors [volume 2]

(Chicago, 1914).

Historical Encyclopedia; History of Knox County, Edited by W. Selden Gale

and George Candee Gale (Chicago, 1899).

Historical Encyclopedia; History of Lake County. Edited by Charles A.

Partridge (Chicago, 1902).

Historical Encyclopedia; History of Lee County. Edited by A. C. Bardwell

(Chicago, 1904).

Historical Encyclopedia; History of McDonough County. Edited by Alexander

McLean (Chicago, 1907).

History of McLean County. Edited by Ezra M. Prince and John H. Burnham

[volume 2] (Chicago, 1908).

History of Peoria County. Edited by David McCulloch [volume 2] (Chicago

and Peoria, 1902).

BIBLIOGRAPHY 991

History of Rock Island County .... by special authors and contributors

[volume 2] (Chicago, 1914).

History of St. Clair County. Edited by A. S. Wilderman and A. A. Wilderman

[volume 2] (Chicago, 1907).

History of Sangamon County. — Edited by Paul Selby [volume 2] (Chicago,

1912).

Historical Encyclopedia; History of Schuyler County. Edited by Howard F.

Dyson (Chicago, 1908).

History of Shelby County. Edited by George D. Chafee [volume 2] (Chicago,

1910).

History of Tazewell County. Edited by Ben C. Allensworth [volume 2] (Chi-
cago, 1905).
I History of JVarren County. Edited by Hugh R. Moffet and Thomas H. Rogers

Jj[volume 2I (Chicago, 1903).
Beckwith, Hiram W., History of Vermilion County, together with historic notes on the

Northwest, gleaned from early authors, old maps and manuscripts, private and

official correspondence .... (Chicago, 1879).
Bent, Charles (ed.). History of Whiteside County, Illinois .... with numerous

biographical and family sketches (Morrison, 1877).
Biographical and Genealogical Record of LaSalle County, Illinois, The Lewis Pub-
lishing Company, 2 volumes (Chicago, 1900).
Biographical and Reminiscent History of Richland, Clay and Marion Counties,

Illinois, B. F. Bowen and Company (Indianapolis, 1909).
Biographical Review of Johnson, Massac, Pope and Hardin Counties, Illinois, con-
taining biographical sketches of prominent citizens Biographical

Publishing Company (Chicago, 1893).
BrinkerhoflF, J. H. G., Brinkerhoff's History of Marion County, Illinois (Indianapolis,

Church, Charles A., History of Rockford and Winnebago County, Illinois, from the
first settlement in 1834 to the Civil War (Rockford, 1900).

Clarke, S. J., History of McDonougk County, Illinois, its cities, towns and villages,
with early reminiscences, personal incidents .... (Springfield, 1878).

Combined History of Edwards, Lawrence and Wabash Counties, Illinois, with illus-
trations descriptive of their scenery and biographical sketches of some of their
prominent men and pioneers. J. L. McDonough and Company (Edwardsville,
1883).

Combined History of Randolph, Monroe and Perry Counties, Illinois, with illustrations
descriptive of their scenery and biographical sketches of some of their prominent
men and pioneers. J. L. McDonough and Company (Edwardsville, 1883).

Commemorative Biographical and Historical Record of Kane County, Illinois, con-
taining full page portraits and biographical sketches of prominent citizens, together
with portraits and biographies of the governors of Illinois . . . Beers, Leggett
and Company (Chicago, 1888).

Cooper, Marshal M., History of Jerseyville, Illinois, 1822 to igoi (Jerseyville, 1901).

Counties of Cumberland, Jasper and Richland, Illinois, Historical and Biographical,
F. A. Battey and Company (Chicago, 1884).

992 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Currey, J. Seymour, Chicago: Its History and Its Builders, a Century of Marvelous

Growth, 5 volumes (Chicago, 19 12).
Duis, E., The Good Old Times, McLean County, Illinois, containing two hundred and

sixty-one sketches of old settlers .... (Bloomington, 1874).
Eames, Charles M., Historic Morgan and Classic Jacksonville. Compiled .... by

Charles M. Eames .... with introduction by Prof. Harvey W. Milligan

(Jacksonville, 1885).
Erwin, Milo, History of Williamson County, Illinois, from the earliest limes, down to

the present, with an accurate account of the secession movement .... (Marion,

1876).
Ford, Henry A., History of Putnam and Marshall Counties; embracing an account of

the settlement, early progress and formation of Bureau and Stark Counties; with

an appendix, containing notices of old settlers .... (Lacon, i860).
Goodspeed, Weston, and Daniel Healy (ed.), History of Cook County, Illinois ....

a general survey of Cook County history, including a condensed history of Chicago

and specialaccount of districts outside the city limits . . . ', 20 volumes (Chicago,

1909).
Gross, Lewis M., Past and Present of DeKalb County, Illinois, 1 volumes (Chicago

1907).
Halsey, John J. (ed.), A History of Lake County, Illinois, (Chicago, 1912).
History of Adams County, Illinois, containing a history of the county, its cities, towns

.... a biographical directory of its citizens .... general and local statistics,

portraits of early settlers and prominent men .... Murray, Williamson and

Phelps (Chicago, 1879).
History of Carroll County, Illinois, containing a history of the county, its cities, towns

.... a biographical directory of its citizens, war record of its volunteers in the late

rebellion . . . . H. F. Kett and Company (Chicago, 1878).
History of Champaign County, Illinois, with illustrations descriptive of its scenery, and

biographical sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers. Brink, Mc-

Donough and Company (Edwardsville, 1878).
History of Christian County, Illinois, with illustrations descriptive of its scenery, and

biographical sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers. Brink, Mc-

Donough and Company (Edwardsville, 1880).
History of DeWitt County, Illinois, with biographical sketches of prominent ....

citizens of the county. Pioneer Publishing Company (Chicago, 1910).
History of Fulton County, Illinois; together with sketches of its cities .... educa-

tional, religious, civil, military, and political history, portraits .... and biog-
raphies of representative citizens .... Charles C. Chapman and Company

(Peoria, 1879).
History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton, Franklin and Williamson Counties, Illinois,
from the earliest time to the present; together with .... biographical sketches

.... The Goodspeed Publishing Company (Chicago, 1887).
History of Greene County, Illinois .... containing a history of the county; its cities

.... a biographical directory of its citizens . v . . portraits of its early settlers

and prominent men .... Donnelley, Gassette and Loyd, Publishers (Chicago,

1879).

BIBUOGRAPHY 993

History of Greene and Jersey Counties, Illinois, together with sketches of the towns
.... educational, civil, military and political history; portraits .... and
biographies of representative men .... Continental Historical Company
(Springfield, 1885).

History of Jackson County, Illinois, with illustrations descriptive of its scenery, and
biographical sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers. Brink, Mc-
Donough and Company (Edwardsville, 1878).

History of Knox County, Illinois; together with sketches of the cities .... record of
its volunteers in the late war, educational, religious, civil and military history
.... and biographical sketches .... Charles C. Chapman and Company
(Chicago, 1878).

History of La Salle County, Illinois, together with sketches of its cities .... educa-
tional, religious, civil, military and political history .... Inter-State Publish-
ing Company, 2 volumes (Chicago, 1886).

History of McHenry County, Illinois, together with sketches of its cities .... educa-
tional, religious, civil, military, and political history, portraits .... and
biographies of representative citizens .... Inter-State Publishing Company
(Chicago, 1885).

History of Madison County, Illinois, with biographical sketches of many prominent
men and pioneers, W. R. Brink and Company (Edwardsville, 1882).

History of Marion and Clinton Counties, Illinois, with illustrations descriptive of the
scenery, and biographical sketches of some of the prominent men and pioneers.
Brink, McDonough and Company (Edwardsville, 1881).

History of Menard and Mason Counties, Illinois, containing a history of the counties
.... portraits of early settlers and prominent men . . . . O. L. Baskin and
Company, Historical Publishers (Chicago, 1879)^

History of Morgan County, Illinois .... containing a history of the county ....
a biographical directory of its citizens .... portraits of its early settlers and
prominent men .... Donnelley, Loyd and Company (Chicago, 1878).

History of Ogle County, Illinois, containing a history of the county, its cities . . . . a
biographical directory of its citizens .... portraits of early settlers and promi-
nent men . . . . H. F. Kett and Company (Chicago, 1878).

History of Pike County, Illinois; together with sketches of its cities .... educational,
religious, civil, military, and political history .... Charles C. Chapman and
Company (Chicago, 1880).

History of St. Clair County, Illinois, with illustrations of its scenery, and biographical
sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers. Brink, McDonough and
Company (Edwardsville, 1881).

History of Sangamon County, Illinois; together with sketches of its cities .... edu-
cational, religious, civil, military, and political history; portraits .... and
biographies of representative citizens .... Inter-State Publishing Company
(Chicago, 1 881).

History of fVayne and Clay Counties, Illinois, Globe Publishing Company, Historical
Publishers (Chicago, 1884).

994 ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

History of Winnebago County, Illinois .... containing a history of the county
.... a biographical directory of its citizens .... portraits of early settlers and
prominent men . . . . H. F. Kett and Company (Chicago, 1877).

Jones, Lottie E., History of Fermilion County, Illinois, a tale of its evolution, settle-
ment and progress .... 2 volumes (Chicago, 191 1).

McBride, J. C, Past and Present of Christian County, Illinois .... (Chicago,
1904).

Massie, M. D., Past and Present of Pike County, Illinois, together with biographical
sketches of many of its prominent .... citizens and illustrious dead (Chicago,
1906).

Matson, Nehemiah, Map of Bureau County, Illinois, with sketches of its early settle-
ment (Chicago, 1867).

Miner, Edwards, Past and Present of Greene County, Illinois (Chicago, 1905).

Moore, Roy L., History of Woodford County, a concise history of the settlement and
growth of Woodford County (Eureka, 1910).

Moses, John, and Joseph Kirkland, History of Chicago, Illinois, 1 volumes (Chicago,
1895)-

Page, O. J., History of Massac County, Illinois, with life sketches and portraits
(n.p., n.d.)

Past and Present of Kane County, Illinois, containing a history of the county . . . . a
directory of its citizens .... portraits of early settlers and prominent men
.... William LeBaron, Jr., and Company (Chicago, 1878).

Perrin, William H., (ed.). History of Bond and Montgomery Counties, Illinois
(Chicago, 1882).

Perrin, William H., (ed.). History of Cass County, Illinois (Chicago, 1882).

Perrin, William H., (ed.). History of Crawford and Clark Counties, Illinois (Chicago,
1883).

Portrait and Biographical Album of Champaign County, Illinois, containing ....
portraits and biographical sketches of prominent .... citizens .... together
with portraits and biographies of all the governors of Illinois .... Chapman
Brothers (Chicago, 1887).

Portrait and Biographical Album of DeKalb County, Illinois, containing ....
portraits and biographical sketches of prominent .... citizens .... together
with portraits and biographies of all the governors of Illinois .... Chapman
Brothers (Chicago, 1883).

Portrait and Biographical Album of McLean County, Illinois, containing ....
portraits and biographical sketches of prominent .... citizens .... together
with portraits and biographies of all the governors of Illinois .... Chapman
Brothers (Chicago, 1887).

Portrait and Biographical Album of Rock Island County, Illinois, containing ....
portraits and biographical sketches of prominent .... citizens .... together

, with portraits and biographies of all the governors of Illinois .... Biographical
Publishing Company (Chicago, 1885).
Portrait and Biographical Album of Warren County, Illinois, containing ....
portraits and biographical sketches of prominent .... citizens .... together
with portraits and biographies of all the governors of Illinois .... Chapman
Brothers (Chicago, 1886).

BIBLIOGRAPHY 995

Portrait and Biographical Record of fVinnebago and Boone Counties. Illinois^ contain-
ing biographical sketches of prominent .... citizens, together with biographies
of all the governors of the state .... Biographical Publishing Company
(Chicago, 1892).

Power, John Carroll, History of Springfield, Illinois, its .... advantages for
business, manufacturing, etc. (Springfield, 1871).

Redmond, Patrick H., History of ^uincy, and its Men of Mark, or facts and figures
exhibiting its advantages and resources, manufactures and commerce (Quincy,
1869).

Rice, James M., Peoria, City and County, Illinois, a record of settlement, organization,
progress and achievement, 2 volumes (Chicago, 1912).

Richmond, C. W. (ed.). History of Du Page County, Illinois, (Aurora, 1877).

Wall, John A., IFatl's History of Jefferson County, Illinois (Indianapolis, 1909).

INDEXES

Index of Names

Adams, Augustus, amendments, 203,
612, 628; appointment to committee
and office, 65; biographical notice of,
949; remarks, 617; resolutions, 43.

Akin, George W. (John W.), amend-
ments, 700, 702; appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
949; remarks, 754, 860.

Allen, Willis, appointment to commit-
tees, 65, 66; biographical notice of,
949; remarks, 207, 474, 619, 621;
reports, 521, 688.

Anderson, Samuel, appointment to
committee and office, 65; biographi-
cal notice of, 950. ,

Archer, William R., addresses, 98-99,
350-352, 434-438; amendments, 23,
353.454)615.770.793; appointment
to committees, 65,66, 159, 774; bio-
graphical notice of, 950; remarks, 23,
47, 61, 89, 127, 155, 183, 462, 540, 621,
648, 669, 795, 8ii, 888; reports, 190;
resolutions, 46, 71.

Armstrong, George W., amendments,
291, 609, 654, 720, 766, 772, 784, 800,
804, 848; appointment to committees,
65. 159; biographical notice of, 950;
remarks, 551, 723; resolutions, 24;
substitutes, 520, 763-764, 767.

Atherton, Martin, amendments, 805;
appointment to committee, 65; bio-
graphical notice of, 950; remarks,
921.

Bailey, Gilbert S., biographical notice
of, I59n.

Ballingall, Patrick, addresses, 534-539;
amendments, 309, 608-609; appoint-
ment to committees, 65, 5 14, 775;
biographical notice of, 950; remarks,
53. 59. 62, 86, 519, 521, 542, 549, 787;
resolutions, 7-8; request to with-
draw, 66; substitutes, 854.

Bargar, John S., biographical notice of,
gn.

Bergen, John G., biographical notice of,
22n.

Blair, Montgomery, address, 123; ap-
pointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 951.

Blakely, William H., appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice of,
951.

Bond, Benjamin, addresses, 417-419,
^33; amendments, 353, 855; appoint-
ment to committee, 66; biographical
notice of, 951; remarks, 3, 13,
287, 723, 724; resolutions, 3, 201, 722.

Booth, Louis M., appointment to office,

Bosbyshell, William, addresses, 651-
654, 922-923; amendments, 444, 610,
871; appointment to committees, 65,
514, 777; biographical notice of, 951;
petitions, 787; resolutions, 201.

Brockman, James, amendments, 67,
303, 644, 870; appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of,
951; remarks, 112, 182, 200, 202, 219,
397, 516, 883, 942; petitions, 395;
remarks, 58, 176, 939; resolutions, 9,
48; substitutes, 731.

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Brown, George T., addresses, 828-831;
amendments, 774, 827, 834; appoint-
ment to committees, 65, 769; bio-
graphical notice of, 951; remarks,
no, 832, 833; resolutions, 350, 447.

Bunsen, George, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
951; resolutions, 284.

Butler, Horace, addresses, 566-569;
amendments, 514; appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice
of, 952; petitions, 305; remarks, 371,
618, 643, 763; resolutions, 300;
substitutes, 655.

Caldwell, Albert G., addresses, 680-683,
689-693, 757-759; amendments, 285,
333, 499. 623, 644, 703, 772, 845-846;
appointment to committees, 65, 66,
769; biographical notice of, 952;
remarks, 108, 507, 617, 623, 630, 659,
703, 711, 724, 742, 757, 776, 780, 808,
846; request to withdraw from com-
mittee, 66; substitutes, 498, 507, 709,
710, 729, 928-929.

Campbell, James M., amendments, 613,
804, 889; appointment to committee,
66; biographical notice of, 952;
remarks, 298; resolutions, 47, 83, 196,
298.

Campbell, Thompson, addresses, 31-37,
76-78, 451-452, 475-481, 516-518,
572-577, 816-817, 822-823, 831-833,
848-849, 900-921; amendments, 22,
83, 385, 389, 475, 802, 888; appoint-
ment to committees, 65, 775, 777;
biographical notice of, 953; remarks,
68, 88, 156, 241, 247, 362, 384-386,
479. 488, 516. 521, 557-558, 796,
842, 848, 923, 925; resolutions, 46,
71, 250, 349; request to withdraw
from committee, 238; substitutes,
379, 899-

Canaday, John, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
953; resolutions, 251, 897.

Carter, Thomas B., appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice
of, 953-

Casey, Franklin S., amendments, 71;
appointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 953.

Casey, Zadoc, appointment to commit-
tees and offices, i, 65, 770, 777;
biographical notice of, 953; re-
marks, 513, 630, 841, 844; reports,
250, 340; resolutions, 276, 334, 487,
628.

Choate, Charles, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of, 954.

Church, Selden M., amendments, 192,
453. 515. 819, 864; appointment to
committee and office, 66; biographi-
cal notice of, 954; remarks, 105,
160, 204, 219; resolutions, 83.

Churchill, Alfred, amendments, 356,
393, 404, 626, 644; appointment to
committee and office, 66; biographi-
cal notice of, 954; remarks, 96, 120,
166, 241, 618, 723; reports, 800;
resolutions, 196; request to withdraw,
248.

Cline, William J., appointed assistant,
door-keeper pro tem, I.

Cloud, Newton, addresses, 4-5, 824-
826; biographical notice of, 954;
elected president, 4; petitions, 45.

Colby, Eben F., amendments, 839;
appointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 955; remarks,
540; resolutions, 889.

Constable, Charles H., amendments,
186, 401, 443, 778; appointment to
committee, 65, 775; biographical
notice of, 955; remarks, 107, 175,
195, 196, 200, 241, 244, 709, 711, 713,
787, 803, 851, 887; resolutions, 43,
igo, 201, 721, 775; substitutes, 766.

Crain, John, amendments, 649;appoint-
ment to committee, 66; biographical
notice of, 955; remarks, 722; reports,
628, 640, 730.

INDEXES

lOOI

Cross, Robert J., amendments, 307,
361, 375, 405, 785; appointment to
committee, 65, 777; biographical
notice of, 955; petitions, 324, 457,
485; resolutions, 250.

Cross, Samuel J., appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of, 956.

Dale, Michael G., addresses, 375-378,
788-790; amendments, 361,375, 454;
appointment to committees, 65, 775;
biographical notice of, 956; petitions,
854; remarks, 128, 788, 854.

Davis, David, addresses, 461-462, 753-
754, 843; amendments, 22, 309, 405,
888; appointment to committees, 66,
159; biographical notice of, 956;
petitions, 171; remarks, 113, 120,
160, 218, 661, 735, 753, 812, 842, 843;
resolution, 82.

Davis, James M., addresses, 128-130,
369-371. 569-572, 850-851, 861-862;
amendments, 24, 100, 309, 393, 440,
444, 641, 648, 739, 793, 871,921,
926; appointment to committees, 65,
777; biographical notice of, 956;
remarks, 19, 51, 58,60,63,75,92, 100,
112, 120, 128, 161, 163, 166, 196,339,
385, 391, 401, 510, 522, 618, 624, 650,
659, 672, 756, 780, 795, 805, 850-852,
861, 924; resolutions, 44, 84, 291.

Davis, Thomas, G. C, addresses, 28-29,
430-434. 494-497. 558-566, 748-751.
93S-93i\ amendments, 453, 514, 792;
appointment to committees, 65, 159,
775; biographical notice of, 957;
remarks, 75, 95, 327, 339, 479, 481,
555. 558, 723. 813; reports, 383, 446;
resolutions, 84, 250; substitutes, 469,
641.

Dawson, John, addresses, 818; amend-
ments, 357, 444, 608, 626, 628, 632,
785,817; appointment to committees,
66, 775; biographical notice of, 957;
remarks, 818; reports, 673; resolu-
tions, 70, 84, 170, 191, 383.

Deitz, Peter W., amendments, 152, 174,
200, 308, 727, 736, 772, 873; appoint-
ment to committee, 66; biographical
notice of, 957; petitions, 424; substi-
tutes, 925.

Dement, John, addresses, 16-19, 177"
179. 491-494. 683-685, 751-753, 931-
933; amendments, 612, 688,721;
appointment to committees, 65, 5 14;
biographical notice of, 957; remarks,
50.51, 53. 67. 68, 163, 177, 214, 240,
642, 649, 658, 661, 663, 669,670;
reports, 124, 189, 673; resolutions,
67,71,942; substitutes,890.

Dresser, Charles, biographical notice of,
42n.

Dummer, Henry E., appointment to
committees, 65, 159,774; biographical
notice of, 958; petitions, 524.

Dunlap, James, amendments, 668;
appointment to committee, 65; ap-
pointed teller, 4; biographical
notice of, 958.

Dunn, Harvey, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
958.

Dunsmore, Daniel, appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice
of, 958; resolutions, 42.

Eccles, Joseph T., amendments, 200,
498, 805, 823; appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of,
958; remarks, 193, 506, 840; report,
90; resolutions, 636, 942; substitutes,
806, 855.

Edmonson, John W. F., amendments,
71; appointment to committees, 65,
159; biographical notice of, 959;
resolutions, 70, 109, 943, substitutes,
520.

Edwards, Cyrus, addresses, 171-174,
346-349,885-887; amendments, 511,
802; appointment to committees, 65,
66, 513; biographical notice of, 959;
remarks, 52, 54, 249, 398, 512, 623,

ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Edwards, Cyrus (cont.)

821; reports, 673, 927, 931; request
to withdraw, 247; resolutions, 7, 21,
43. 345-346, 878; substitutes, 5, 354,
885.

Edwards, Ninian W., amendments, 303,
310, 356, 482, 728, 773, 820, 824, 868;
appointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 959; petitions,
787, remarks, 89, 162, 332, 358, 385,
407; substitutes, 5, 334, 700, 928.

Evey, Edward, appointment to com-
mittees, 65, 514; biographical notice
of, 959; remarks, 185; resolutions, 44.

Ewing, James T., biographical notice
of, 960.

Farwell, Seth B., amendments, 649, 760
772; appointment to committee and
office, 65, 66, 159, 514; biographical
notice of, 960; petitions, 82, 395, 498;
remarks, 449, 624, 671, 706, 756.

Frick, Frederick, appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of, 960.

Geddes, Thomas, addresses, 227;
amendments, 119, 386, 703, 713, 720,
765; appointment to committee,
65; biographical notice of, 960; re-
marks, 99, 155, 196, 485, 647, 762;
resolutions, 48, 191.

Graham, James, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
960; remarks, 438, 821; substitutes,
793-

Green, Henry R., appointment to com-
mittee and office, 65; biographical
notice of, 960; remarks, 39, 301, 371,
850, 921.

Green, Peter, appointment to commit-
tee, 65; biographical notice of, 960.

Green, William B., appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice
of, 961.

Gregg, David L., addresses, 165, 438-
440, 528-534, 675-677, 839-840, 933-

Dregg, David L. (cont.)

935; amendments, 164-165, 675, 735,
760; appointment to committees, 66,
I59> 769; biographical notice of, 961;
remarks, 86, i66, 239, 262, 438, 450,
471, 508, 539. 545, 548, 549, 615. 722,
723, .839, 847, 850, 852; reports, 191,
812; resolutions, 518, 943.

Grimshaw, William A., appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice of,
961; resolutions, 50, 896; substitutes.

Hale, Albert, biographical notice of,
45n; resolutions concerning, 387-388;
457-

Harding, Abner C, addresses, 293-297;
amendments, 154, 392, 614, 766;
appointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 961 ; remarks,
195, 245; substitutes, 336, 392, 767.

Harlan, Justin, appointment to com-
mittees, 65, 159, 514, 769; biograph-
ical notice of, 962.

Harper, Joshua, appointment to com-
mittee and office, 65, 774; biograph-
ical notice of, 962.

Harvey, Curtis K., addresses, 472-474;
amendments, 94, 310, 323, 612, 645,
657, 720, 728, 800, 868, 869; appoint-
ment to committees, 65, 159, 769;
biographical notice of, 962; remarks,
103, 156, 195, 268, 329, 472-474. 643.
647, 732, 776, 780, 882; reports, 312,
314. 315; resolutions, 43; substitutes,
498, 508.

Hatch, Jeduthan, appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of,
962; remarks, 388.

Hawley, Nelson, amendments, B65;
appointment to committee, 65; bio-
graphical notice of, 963; petitions,
356; resolutions, 290.

Hay, Daniel, amendments, 626, 720;
appointment to committee, 65; bio-
graphical notice of, 963.

INDEXES

1003

Hayes, Snowden, addresses, 99, 810-
811,890-895; amendments, 455, 846,
896; appointment to committee, 66;
biographical notice of, 963; remarks,
78, 286, 442, 790, 810, 847, 852, 926;
reports, iii, 267, 289, 730; resolu-
tions, 43, 160, 249, 724; substitutes,
154, 867.

Heacock, Reuben E., appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice
of, 9('3-

Henderson, Hugh, amendments, 291;
appointment to committees, 65, 5 14,
774; biographical notice of, 964;
petitions, 787; remarks, 168,362,581.

Hill, George H., appointment to com-
mittees, 66, 159; biographical notice
of, 964; resolutions, 302.

Hoes, Abraham, appointment to com-
mittees, 65, 514; biographical notice
of, 964; petitions, 289.

Hogue, James M., amendments, 443,
465, 656, 765, 802; appointment to
committees, 65, 159; biographical
notice of, 964; remarks, 152,623,813;
substitutes, 170, 637, 767.

Holmes, William H., amendments, 824;
appointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 964.

Hunsaker, Samuel, appointment to
committee and office, 65, 159; bio-
graphical notice of, 964.

Hurlbut, Stephen A., amendments, 84,
85, 309, 454, 785, 841; appointment
to committees, 65, 514; biographical
notice of, 964; remarks, 86, iii, 214,
539, 677, 786.

Huston, John, appointment to com-
mittees, 65, 66; biographical notice of,
965.

Jackson, Aaron C, appointment to
committees, 66, 159; biographical
notice of, 965; petitions, 395.

James, James A., appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of, 965.

Jenkins, Alexander M., addresses, 220-
221; amendments, 448; appointment
to committee, 66; biographical notice
of, 965; petitions, 636; remarks, 89,
112, 119, 220; reports, 111,315,469;
resolutions, 45, 315; substitutes, 855.

Jones, Humphrey B., amendments, 488,
514,773; appointment to committee,
65; biographical notice of, 965; peti-
tions, 104; remarks, 619; reports, 186.

Judd, Thomas, appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of,
966.

Kenner, Alvin R., amendments, 123,
200, 403, 444, 484, 514, 645, 699, 720,
804; appointment to committee, 66;
biographical notice of, 966; remarks,
148, 176; resolutions, 195, 201; sub-
stitutes, 927.

Kinney, Simon, amendments, 881; ap-
pointment to committees, 66, 5 14;
biographical notice of, 966; remarks,
396, 623, 843; substitutes, 68, 297.

Kinney, William C, addresses, 524-527;
amendments, 47, 508; appointment
to committees, 65, 66, 5 14; biographi-
cal notice of, 966; petitions, 457;
remarks, 47, 89, 643; reports, 314;
resolutions, 250.

Kitchell, Alfred, addresses, 677-680;
amendments, 47, 310, 455, 488, 613,
865, 866; appointment to committee
and office, 66, 159; biographical
notice of, 966; remarks, 60, 154, 507,
619, 677; resolutions, 195; substi-
tutes, 200, 633, 851.

Knapp, Augustus R., addresses, 661-
666; appointment to committees,
65, 159; biographical notice of, 967;
remarks, 792, 880; resolutions, 457;
substitutes, 359, 375, 631.

Knapp, Nathan M., amendments, 392,
819; appointment to committee, 66;
biographical notice of, 967; resolu-
tions, 48, 83, 388.

I004

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Knowlton, Lincoln B., addresses, 222,
582-607; amendments, 22, 386, 726;
appointment to committees, 65, 66,
775; biographical notice of, 967;
petitions, 395; remarks, 38, 78, 97,
180, 185, 246, 332, 339, 581, 795, 812;
resolutions, 290; substitutes, 765,
845.

Knox, James, amendments, 397, 608;
appointment to committee, 65; bio-
graphical notice of, 967; remarks,
180; resolutions, 170.

Kreider, George, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
968.

Lander, Samuel, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
968.

Lasater, James M., appointment to
committees, 65, 66; biographical
notice of, 968.

Laughlin, William, appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice
of, 968.

Lavely, William, biographical notice
of, 968.

Lemon, George B., amendments, 361,
836; appointment to committee, 66;
biographical notice of, 968.

Lenley, Isaac, appointment to commit-
tee, 66; biographical notice of, 968.

Lockwood, Samuel Drake, amendments,
361, 403, 488, 628, 702, 726, 806, 819,
866; appointment to committee, 65;
biographical notice of, 968; remarks,
362,384,405,733, 763; reports. Ill;
resolutions, 108, 387, 942; substitutes,
764, 865.

Logan, Stephen T., addresses, 13-17,
39-41, 36J-367. 396-397; amend-
ments, 24, 49, 119, 160, 170, 174, 307,
335. 360, 369. 407. 445. 448. 514, 630.
637, 658, 674, 784, 868, 889, 524, 925;
appointed teller, 4; appointment to
committees, 65, 66, 514, 769; bio-

Logan, Stephen T. (cent.)

graphical notice of, 969; remarks, 2,
26, 33. 39. 48.49, 51. 57. 60, 62, 105,
121, 123, 156, 163, 167, 203, 213, 219,
287. 301. 331. 358. 402. 405. 451. 475.
659, 826, 841, 851, 889, 926; reports,
814; resolutions, 5, 768; substitutes,
444.

Loudon, John T., addresses, 135-137;
amendment, 202; appointment to
coAimittee, 66; biographical notice of,
969; remarks, 144, 245, 262, 661.

McCallen, Andrew, addresses, 131-135,
860-861; amendments, 24, 85, 353,
386, 392, 613, 637, 645, 720, 819, 867;
appointment to committees, 65, 66;
biographical notice of, 969; remarks,
155. 520, 542, 548, 550, 619, 621,
776, 805, 813, 860; resolutions,
44, 201; substitutes, 109, 656, 820,
874-

McClure, William, appointment to com-
mittees, 65, 159; biographical notice
of, 969.

McCuUey, John, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
969.

McHatton, Alexander, appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice
of, 970.

Manly, Uri, appointment to commit-
tees, 65, 514, 774; biographical notice
of, 970; withdrawal from convention,
926.

Markley, David, amendments, 334, 630,
695, 708, 729, 766, 799, 819, 821, 823,
835; appointment to committee, 66;
biographical notice of, 970; remarks,
120, 643, 888; resolution, 69; substi-
tutes, 656, 785.

Marshall, Franklin S. D., amend-
ments, 84, 444, 488; appointment to
committees, 65, 775; biographical
notice of, 970; petitions, 615; resolu-
tions, 250.

INDEXES

1005

Marshall, Thomas A., appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice
of, 970; substitutes, 767.

Mason, John West, amendments, 608;
appointment to committee, 66, bio-
graphical notice of, 970; remarks,
181; resolutions, 43.

Matheny, James H., appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice of,
970.

Mieure, John, appointment to commit-
tee, 65; biographical notice of, 971.

Miller, Robert, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of, 971.

Minshall, William A., addresses, 409-
414, 744-748; amendments, 2, 335,
511; appointment to committees, 65,
159; biographical notice of, 971;
remarks, 2, 12, 59, 74, 138, 203, 287,
341, 410, 618; resolutions, 42, 153;
substitutes, 766.

MofFett, Garner, appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
971; petitions, 395; resolutions, 85.

Moore, Henry W., appointment to
office, 1,5; biographical notice of, 971.

Moore, William S. (George S. Moore
in roll of convention), appointment
to committee, 66; biographical
notice of, 971.

Morris, Richard G., appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice of.

Nichols, Jacob M., appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,97i.

Northcott, Benjamin F., addresses, 426-
430; amendments, 335, 356; appoint-
ment to committee, 66; biographical
notice of, 971; remarks, 777; resolu-
tions, 45.

Norton, Jesse O., addresses, 210-212;
amendments, 94, 210, 386; appoint-
ment to committee, 66; biographical
notice of, 971 ; remarks, 63, 95, 110,
163, 362.

Oliver, John, appointment to commit-
tee, 65; biographical notice of, 971.

Pace, George W., appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of,
971.

Palmer, Henry D., amendments, 803,
865; appointment to committee, 65;
biographical notice of, 971; remarks,
20, 53. 57. 73. 182, 618, 795.

Palmer, John M., addresses, 754-756;
amendments, 46, 488, 771; appoint-
ment to committees, 65, 159; bio-
graphical notice of, 973; remarks, 49,
51, 61, 118, 169, 199, 317, 330, 704,
754, 762, 763, 764, 776, 790, 826, 848,
863; reports, 769; resolutions, 8, 44,
389, 446.

Peters, Onslow, addresses, 458-461;
amendments, 392, 458, 515, 698, 726;
appointment to committees, 65, 769;
biographical notice of, 973; remarks,
27. 79, 407. 458. 522, 616, 723;
resolutions, 43; substitutes, 482, 762.

Pinckney, Daniel J., addresses, 205-
207; appointment to committees, 65,
159; biographical notice of, 974;
remarks, 105, 241, 842, 862.

Powers, Williams B., amendments, 100,
736; appointment to committee, 65;
biographical notice of, 974; resolu-
tion, 250.

Pratt, O. C, addresses, 552-555, 578-
580, 713-715; amendments, 24, 702,
739. 741; appointment to committees,
65. 159. 769; biographical notice of,
974; remarks, 52, 161, 242, 401, 762,
794, 861, 895, 925, 938; substitutes,
69. 85, 741, 764, 896.

Rives, George W., appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of,
974-

Robbins, Ezekiel W., addresses, 79-81;
amendments, 43, 54, 488, 611, 648,
771,775; appointment to committee.

ioo6

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Robbins, Ezekiel W. (cont.)

65; biographical notice of, 975; peti-
tions, 104,312,446,732; remarks, 67,
649; resolutions, 24, 46, 199.

Robinson, Benaiah, appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice
of. 975-

Roman, William W., amendments, 516,
626; appointment to committee, 65;
biographical notice of, 975; remarks,
840.

Rountree, Hiram, amendments, 90, 285,
307,511; appointment to committee,
65; biographical notice of, 975; re-
marks, 59, 68, 181, 193, 19J, 630;
resolutions, 45, 192; substitutes, 68,
383.

Scates, Walter B., addresses, 29-31, 90-
92, 138-143, 743; amendments, 124,
190, 307, 309. 361, 515. 625, 627, 644,
732, 802, 925; appointment to com-
mittees, 4, 65, 66, 514, 774; bio-
graphical notice of, 975; remarks, i,
2,3. '3.47. 51.79. no. 137.193.244.
262, 324, 327, 332, 542, 732, 742, 787,
792, 801, 898, 926; reports, 106, 108,
3'^3> 939; resolutions, i, 43, 44,
45, 191, 250, 774; substitutes,
785.

Servant, Richard B., amendments, 190,
456, 484, 796; appointment to office,
65, 774; biographical notice of, 976;
petitions, 312, 340; remarks, 56,57,
185, 244, 407, 475; reports, 498;
resolutions, 250, 302; substitutes,
761.

Sharp, Thomas C, amendments, 354;
appointment to committee, 65; bio-
graphical notice of, 976; resolutions,
250; substitutes, 359.

Sherman, Francis C, amendments, 152,
654; appointment to committee, 65;
biographical notice of, 976; remarks,
6. 52. 153. SI9. 555. 617. 646, 658,
667, 713; reports, 106, 775.

Shields, William, amendment, 772; ap-
pointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 976; remarks,
242; resolutions, 46.

Shumway, Dorice D., amendments, 48,
191, 488, 499, 514, 698, 736, 872;
appointment to committees, 65, 159;
biographical notice of, 977; remarks,
52, 246, 287; resolutions, 65, 66, 71,
83, 301; substitutes, 6^, 83.

Sibley, John, amendment, 802; appoint-
ment to committee, 66; biographical
notice of, 977; remarks, 843.

Sim, William, appointment to commit-
tee, 65, 159; amendments, 699, 865;
petitions, 761; biographical notice of,
977; substitutes, 353.

Simpson, Lewis J., appointment to com-
mittee, 66; biographical notice of,
977; remarks, 883; reports, 284.

Singleton, James W., addresses, 149-
151, 223-227, 229-238, 715-717;
amendments, 154, 284, 306, 695, 734,
760, 764, 773, 834; appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice of,
977; petitions, 219; remarks, 25, 26,
42, 47. 72. 75, 97. "9. 388, 4I4. 712.
733, 826, 863, 881; resolutions, 23,
251; substitutes, 768, 856.

Smith, Edward O., acjdresses, 415-417;
amendments, 773; appointment to
committee, 66; biographical notice
of, 978; remarks, 408.

Smith, Jacob, amendments, 727; ap-
pointment to committees, 65, 777;
biographical notice of, 978; resolu-
tions, 83.

Spencer, John W., appointment to com-
mittees, 65, 5 14; biographical notice of,
978; petitions, 356; resolutions, 201.

Stadden, William, amendments, 626;
appointment to committees, 65, 774,
777; biographical notice of, 978.

Swan, Hurlbut, amendments, 864; ap-
pointment to committee, 65; bio-
graphical notice of, 978.

INDEXES

1007

Thomas, William, address, 186-188;
appointment to committees and
office, 65, 66, 769; biographical notice
of, 978; amendments, 356, 385, 454,
612, 726, 727, 797; remarks, 2, 53, 62,
161, 162, 166, 169, 193, 521-522, 617,
637. 643, 733; reports, 186, 289; sub-
stitutes, 160, 626.

Thompson, William W., amendment,
626; appointment to committee, 65;
biographical notice of, 979; petition,
636; remarks, 114.

Thornton, Anthony, addresses, 542-
547; amendments, 210, 309, 323, 393,
797> 798, B55, 866; appointment to
committees, 66, 774; biographical
notice of, 979; petitions, 82; remarks,
89, 148, 540, 545; resolutions, 85, 250;
reports, 939.

Trower, Thomas, appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of, 979.

TurnbuU, Gilbert, amendments, 392;
appointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 979; remarks,
i55> 207, 374. 388, 527, 617; report,
315; substitute, 357.

Turner, Oaks, appointed to committee
and office, 66; biographical notice of,
980; petitions, 424; resolutions, 85.

Tutt, William, appointment to commit-
tee, 66; biographical notice of, 980.

Tuttle, James, addresses, 835-836; ap-
pointment to committee, 66; bio-
graphical notice of, 980.

Vance, John W., amendments, 740;
appointment to committees, 65, 159;
biographical notice of, 980; substi-
tutes, 819.

Vernor, Zenos H., appointment to com-
mittees, 65; biographical notice of,
980; resolutions, 201, 250.

Wead, Hezekiah, addresses, 9-1 1, 116-
118, 317-322, 399-401, 621-623, 862-
863; amendments, 72, 308,309, 484,

Wead, Hezekiah (cont.)

456, 489, 805; appointment to com-
mittee and office, 65, 514, 775, 777;
biographical notice of, 980; petitions,
312, 457. 775; remarks, 38, 73, 78,
155. 317. 358. 512, 670, 776, 777,
862; reports, 395, 807; resolutions,
9, 48, 191, 290; substitutes, 819,
845.

Webber, Thompson R., appointment to
committee, 65; biographical notice
of, 981.

West, Edward M., addresses, 827-828;
amendments, 633, 771, 803, 805, 868;
appointment to committees, 65, 159;
biographical notice of, 981; remarks,
III, 191, 214, 388, 619, 827; resolu-
tions, 160.

Whiteside, John D., amendments, 308,
644,727,798,836,869,931; appoint-
ment to committees, 66, 159; bio-
graphical notice of, 981; remarks, 49;
reports, 289; substitutes, 403.

Whitney, Daniel H., addresses, I45-
147, 856-860; amendments, 170, 556,
870; appointment to committee, 159;
biographical notice of, 981; remarks,
38, 60, 154, 159, 616, 790, 800, 856;
substitutes, 864.

Williams, Archibald, addresses, 501-
505, 882-883; amendments, 307, 308,
323, 360, 660, 868, 880; appointment
to committees, 65, 514, 777; bio-
graphical notice of, 981; remarks, 4,
7, 19.52,55,57,59,63,95. 148,315,
323, 542, 643, 646, 650, 660, 732, 783,
880, 882-883; resolutions, 284; sub-
stitutes, 819.

Wilson, J. A., appointment to offices, i,
5; biographical notice of, 982.

Witt, Franklin, amendments, 162, 456,
628, 728, 788; appointment to com-
mittee, 65; biographical notice of,
982; substitutes, 778, 779.

Woodson, David M., addresses, 92-94,
419-423, 424-425, 879-880; amend-

ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Woodson, David M. (cont.)
ments, 196, 401, 404, 625, 636, 675,
814; appointment to committee, 66;
biographical notice of, 982; remarks,
37-38, 50, 63, 64, 9a, 401, 547, 677, 705,
879, 895; resolutions, 42,43, 69, 71;

Woodson, David M. (cont.), substitutes,
637. 793-

Worcester, Linus E., amendments, 124;
appointment to committee, 65; bio-
graphical notice of, 983; resolutions,
48; substitute, loo.

Index of Articles and Sections

Article i, boundaries, state.

Article a, distribution of powers of
government, section i, distribution of
powers; section 2, no department to
exercise powers of otliers.

Article 3, the legislative department,
section i, general assembly, legisla-
tive power; section 2, general assem-
bly, members, election of; section 3,
general assembly, qualifications, rep-
resentatives; section 4, general as-
sembly, qualifications, senators; sec-
tion 5, general assembly, senators,
terms of; section 6, general assembly,
members, number of; section 7, gen-
eral assembly, members, disabilities
of; section 8, general assembly, ap-
portionment according to population;
section 9, general assembly, senato-
rial and representative districts, for-
mation; section 10, general assembly,
senatorial and representative dis-
tricts, excess population; section 11,
general assembly, time of meeting;
section 12, general assembly, officers
of, quorum; section 13, general
assembly, journal, yeas, nays; sec-
tion 14, general assembly, right of
protest; section 15, general assembly,
general rules, punishment of mem-
bers; section 16, general assembly,
vacancies; section 17, general assem-
bly, privileges; section 18, gen-
eral assembly, punishment, power
of; section 19, general assembly, ad-
journment and open sessions; sec-
tion 20, general assembly, laws,
style of; section 21, general assembly,

1009

Article 3 (cont.)

procedure on bills; section 22, general
assembly, fees and salaries, restric-
tions; section 23, general assembly,
requirements for bills and acts;
section 24, general assembly, mem-
bers, compensation of; section 25,
general assembly, members, pay;
section 26, appropriations, for ex-
penditures; section 27, impeachment,
power of; section 28, impeachment,
officers liable to judgment; section
29, general assembly, ineligibility;
section 30, oath, officers; section 31,
officers, disqualification by crime;
section 32, general assembly, general
laws on divorce; section 22t compen-
sation, no extra; section 34, suits
against state; section 35, lotteries,
state banks or bank charters not
authorized by general assembly;
section 36, special legislation pro-
hibiting sale of lands; section 37,
appropriations, deficiency of; section
38, credit of state not to be given;
section 39, contracts for supplies;
section 40, apportionment of senators
and representatives by district; sec-
tion 41, canvass of votes for general
assembly; proposed section, general
assembly, prohibition of special privi-
leges or exemptions.

Article 4, the executive department,
section I, executive power; section 2,
governor, election; section 3, gover-
nor, term of office; section 4, gover-
nor, qualifications for; section 5,
governor, residence and salary; sec-

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Article 4 (cont.)

tion 6, governor, oath; section 7,
governor, message to general assem-
bly; section 8, pardon, power of; sec-
tion 9, governor, power over other
offices; section 10, general assembly,
special sessions; section 11, gover-
nor, army and navy, commander-in-
chief; section 12, governor, power of
appointment; section 13, governor,
power to adjourn general assembly;
section 14, lieutenant governor, elec-
tion, term, qualifications; section 15,
lieutenant governor, rights of; section
16, speaker of the senate; section 17,
lieutenant governor, compensation;
section 18, lieutenant governor, suc-
cession to; section 19, governor, suc-
cession to; section 20, governor,
vacancy; section 21, governor, veto
power; section 22, secretary of state;
section 23, auditor of public accounts;
section 24, state treasurer; section 25,
seal of state; section 26, impeach-
ment, officers subject to; proposed
section i, attorney general, proposed
to abolish; proposed section 2,
officers, no life term; proposed section
3, offices, one lucrative office at a
time.

Article 5, the judiciary department,
section i, courts, judicial power
vested in; section 2, supreme court,
members, quorum; section 3, supreme
court, grand divisions; section 4,
supreme court, judges, term of; sec-
tion 5, supreme court, jurisdiction;
section 6, supreme court, terms;
section 7, circuit courts, judges and
districts; section 8, circuit courts,
terms and jurisdiction; section 9,
supreme and circuit court, vacancies;
section 10, judges, salaries and eligi-
bility to other offices; section 11,
judges, eligibility; section la, judges,
removal; section 13, judges, election.

Article J (cont.)

time of; section I4, supreme court,
time of election; section 15, circuit
courts, judges; section 16, county
courts, provided for; section 17,
county courts, judges, election and
term of; section 18, county courts,
jurisdiction; section 19, county
courts, personnel; section 20, county
courts, judges, compensation; section
21, supreme and circuit court clerks,
election of; section 22, courts, judi-
cial officers, commissions; section 23,
officers, election of not provided for in
constitution; section 24, courts, ap-
peals from local courts; section 25,
officers, county, removal; section 26,
process, form of; section 27, justices
of the peace; section 28, state's
attorney; section 29, circuit and
supreme courts, clerks, terms, duties,
compensation; section 30, supreme
court, grand division for election of
judges; section 31, supreme court,
places of meeting; section 32, appeals
and writs of error; section 32, su-
preme court, grand divisions, provi-
sion for altering.

Article 6, election and the right of
suffrage, section 1, suffrage, qualifi-
cation for; section 2, voting by
ballot; section 3, electors, privileges;
section 4, electors, exempt from mili-
tary duty; section j, suffrage,
residence not lost by absence from
United States on business; section 6,
suffrage, residence of soldiers, seamen
and marines; section 7, office,
qualifications, citizenship and resi-
dence; section 8, suffrage, disqualifi-
cation, infamous crime; section 9,
elections, general, change in time of.

Article 7, counties, section i, counties,
formation of new; section 2, counties,
division; section 3, counties, govern-
ment for unorganized; section 4,

INDEXES

Article 7 (cont.)

counties striking off or adding terri-
tory; section 5, county seats, re-
moval; section 6, township organiza-
tion; section 7, sheriff, term of; pro-
posed section, county officers, coroner,
surveyor, election of.

Article 8, militia, section i, persons
subject to service; section 2, exemp-
tions; section 3, officers, election:
section 4, officers, election of generals:
section 5, commissioned by governor:
section 6, privileges.

Article 9, the revenue, section i, taxa-
tion, capitation tax; section 2, taxa-
tion, uniform rule, special taxes;
section 3, taxation, exemption; sec-
tion 4, taxation, redemption from tax
sales; section 6, taxation, powers of
general assembly; proposed section,
form of payment.

Article 10, corporations, section i,
corporations, organization of by
general law; section 2, corporations,
dues; section 3, banks, no state
banks; section 4, banks, liability of
stockholders; section 5, banking cor-
porations, referendum required; sec-
tion 6, corporations; proposed sec-
tion, acts of incorporation, amend-
ment to or repeal of.

Article 11, commons, sectjon i, rights
in common in certain lands.

Article 12, amendments to the consti-
tution, section i, constitutional con-
vention, how called; section 2,
amendments to constitution.

Article 13, liberty and free government,
section I, life, liberty and property;

Article 13 (cont.)

section 2, sovereignty of the people;
section 3, conscientious objectors,
exempt from jury; section 4, office,
no religious test for; section 5, elec-
tions, free and equal; section 6, jury,
trial by; section 7, searches and
seizures; section 8, due process of law;
section 9, accused persons, rights;
section 10, grand jury; section 11,
double jeopardy and eminent domain;
section 12, justice free and prompt;
section 13, habeas corpus; section 14,
penalties proportional to offense;
section 15, imprisonment for debt;
section 16, slavery and involuntary
servitude; section 17, ex post facto
law, contracts, obligation of, and bills
of attainder; section 18, banishment
prohibited; section 19, government,
principles; section 20, civil power,
military subordination; section 21,
assembly and petition, right; section
22, soldiers, quartering; section 23,
press and speech, freedom; section

24, evidence, jury in libel suit; section

25, dueling, punishment; section 26,
dueling, special oath concerning;
proposed section, taxation.

Schedule, section 1-26, section 6,
county commissioners' court; section
18, English language to be used; pro-
posed section, seat of government,
change of.

Article 14, negroes, immigration and
emancipation of in State; proposed
section, restrictions in marriage and
office.

Article 15, state debt tax.

Ill

Index of Subjects

Accused person, rights (art. 13, sec. 9),

865, 944.
Amendments to constitution (art. 12,

sec. 1), 199, 200-201, 927, 928, 944.

See constitutional convention.
Appeals and writs of error (art. 5, sec.

32), 888, 890, 944.
Appointments, see governor.
Apportionment, see general assembly.
Appropriations, deficiency (art. 3, sec.

37), 66, 71, 353, 728-729, 944; for

expenditures (art. 3, sec. 26), 67, 308,

699, 944.
Arbitration tribunal, 108.
Assembly and petition, right of (art. 13,

sec. 2:), 871, 944.
Attorney general, 793.
Auditor of public

23), 190. 514-515. 74-

Ballot, see suffrage.

Banishment prohibited (art. 13, sec. 18),
870, 944.

Banking laws, system of, 85-98, loi,
104, 109.

Banks, banking corporations, referen-
dum required (art. 10, sec. 5), 301,
313-314, 640, 648-657, 669-673, 675-
688,695,703,729,944; charters from
general assembly (art. 3, sec. 35), 109,
721, 944; liability of stockholders
(art. 10, sec. 4), 313-314, 641, 645,
688, 693, 944; no state banks (art. 10,
sec. 3), 69-70, 85-89, loi, 164-170,
251, 252-266, 267-283, 289, 291, 312,
314, 640, 645-648, 695, 703-719, 729,
734, 944; (proposed section) 251,
314, 614, 660, 668, 807, 872.

1013

Bills, see general assembly.

Bills of attainder (art. 13, sec. 17), 867,

870, 944.
Boundaries, state (art. 1), 837, 944.

Canvass of votes for general assembly

(art. 3, sec. 41), 878, 944.
Capital punishment, 85, 111.
Circuit courts, clerks: compensation,

duties, terms of (art. 5, sec. 29), 83,

797-798. 944; election of (art. 5, sec.

21), 83, 806, 944;
judges: district apportionment of

(art. 5, sec. 7), 83, 499, 500-513, 800-

801, 944; time of election (art. 5, sec.

15), 804-805,944;
terms and jurisdiction (art. 5, sec. 8),

83, 801, 944; vacancies, 801-802, 944.
Civil power, military subordination (art.

13, sec. 20), 871, 874,944.
Committee, of the whole: convention
resolved into, 62, 251, 267, 276, 284,
291, 297, 302, 305, 307.308, 315. 3^9,
334. 350, 356, 360, 375, 383, 391, 392,
395. 403. 424. 442, 448. 453. 458. 462,
469, 488, 490, 498, 514, 515, 524, 540,
551, 581, 613, 615, 625, 629, 632, 637,
640, 651; resolutions referred to, 50,
170, 267;

on bill of rights, 65, 83,84, 191, 201,
305, 485, 521, 688, 787, 942; on
division of state into counties and
organizations, 65, 111, 191, 284, 315,
469; on education, 65, 82, 171, 174,
238-250, 284, 289, 290, 305, 356, 395,
424. 457. 485. 498, 524. 615, 769. 898;
on elections and right of suffrage, 65,

84, 105, 158, 170, 446, 787; on execu.

IOI4

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Committee (cont.)
tive department, 65, 71, in, 250; on
finance, 43, 65, 70, 106, 170, 191, 457,
775, 884; on incorporations, 65, 69,
85, loi, 109, 164, 251, 289, 291, 300,
301, 312-315; on judiciary, 65, 71,
82, io6, 108, 109, 159, 250, 315, 383,
424; on law reform, 65, 160, 195, 267,
289, 312, 446, 730, 890; on legislative
business, 43, 65, 71, 83, 124, 162, 189,
195, 201, 284, 305; on militia and
military affairs, 65, 191, 289; on
miscellaneous subjects and questions,
65, 290, 628, 636, 638, 640, 730, 884;
on organization of departments, and
officers connected with executive
department, 65, 84, 159, 190, 250,
30s; on revenue, 65, 71, 83, 90, 186,
192, 250, 289, 340, 809; on revision
and adjustment of the articles of the
constitution adopted by this conven-
tion, and to provide for the alteration
and amendment of the same, 65, 199,
51S. 695. 742. 807, 836, 873, 878, 890,
927. 931. 939, 942, 944; on rules, 7;
special and select: on agriculture,
other resources and internal improve-
ments, 196, 800, 939; on commons,
340,809; on judiciary, 513, 673; on
schedule, 774, 926, 939; on senatorial
and representative districts, 159, 722,
812, 874, 879; on townships, 43, 19J,
395; to compare printed copy of con-
stitution with enrolled one, 945; to
divide the state into grand divisions,
768-769, 887; to prepare address to
people, 775, 941; to procure trans-
lations of constitution resolutions,
889.

Commons, rights in common in certain
lands (art. 11), 201, 809, 944.

Compensation, no extra (art. 3, sec. 2;^,
67,310,720,944.

Constitution, copies for distribution,
775; delivery to secretary of state,
942; signing of, 945; submission of.

Constitution (cont.)
43» 839, 841, 939; vote on adoption
of, 944.

Conscientious objectors, exempt from
jury (art. 13, sec. 3), 250, 289, 854,
944.

Constable, see county officers.

Constitutional convention, call of (art.
12, sec. 0,927,928,944.

Contracts for supplies (art. 3, sec. 39),
190, 356-359, 732, 944; obligation of
(art. 13, sec. 17), 944.

Convention business, invitations re-
ceived, 288, 446; resolutions of sym-
pathy, 345, 446, 701; resolutions of
thanks, 388, 943;

committees: appointment of, 7, 43,
65. 159. 191, 196, 340. 513. 769, 774.
777; requests to withdraw from, 66,
238, 247, 926; resolutions for, 24, 43,
44, 46; vacancy in, 926; employees,
46-47; hall, use of, 298, 323, 721, 848,
896; journal, 160, 487, 942;

members: compensation of, 9, 196-
199, 298, 301; leave of absence, 162,
288, 289, 298, 299, 350, 383, 395, 469,
551, 581, 628, 698, 707, 761, 775;
personal privileges, 338; supplies,
190, 301, 521-522;

officers: address of president pro
tem, 4-5; assistant secretary, 3, 23,
160, 942; election of, pro tem, i, 4, 5,
23; number and compensation of, 3,
4,9-21,23-41; secretary, 5;

organization, oath of office, 1-3;
seating of members, 7, 8, 9;

powers and duties: resolution, 23;
debate, 25-41, action, 41; -•

procedure: address to people, 941 ;
adjournment, 628-629, 841-844, 945;
assembly, i ; order of business, 8, 9,
23. 37, 43.55, 65, 67, 69, 276, 944, 945;
order of proceedings, 55-62, 67-69;
points of order, 75, 174, 297, 389, 628;
705, 706, 707, 708, 729, 777, 809, 897;
prayers, 7, 387, 457, 485-487, 519;

INDEXES

1015

Convention business (cont.)

requests for information, 43, 44;
sessions, 42, 43, 302;

records: absentees, 636; newspaper
reporters, 8; publication of debates,
71-81, 153, 160-161; resolution, 46;
rules: amendment of, 43, 50-55,
340-345; committeeon, 7, 21; limita-
tion on speeches, 628, 629; new rules
proposed, 48, 50, 201, 340, 395, 897;
printing of, 65; quorum, 43, 383,
387. .Sf^ amendments to constitution.

Corporations, dues (art. 10, sec. 2), 312,
640, 644, 695, 944; for encourage-
ment of internal improvements (art.
10, sec. 6), 641, 944; organization by
general law (art. 10, sec. 1), 300, 312,
314, 640, 641-644, 695, 944.

Council of revision, 70.

Counties, division (art. 7, sec. 2), 824-
^33y 944; formation of new (art. 7,
sec. i), 48, 111-124, 821, 824, 897,
944; government for unorganized
(art. 7, sec. 3), 834-835, 944; county
seats, removal of (art. 7, sec. 5), 836,
944, striking off or adding territory
(art. 7, sec. 4), 835-836, 944.

County courts, provided for, (art. 5,
sec. 16), 45, 767-768, 770, 944;

judges: compensation of (art. 5,
sec. 20), 785, 944; election and terms
of (art. 5, sec. 17), 770, 771, 944;

jurisdiction of (art. 5, sec. 18), 771,
772, 944;

personnel (art. 5, sec. 19), 50, 778-
785, 944-

County commissioners court (schedule,
sec. 6), 106-107.

County officers, coroner, surveyor, etc.,
election of (art. 5), 806; recorder, 109,
removal of (art. 5, sec. 25), 804, 806,
944-

Courts, appeals and writs of error (art.
5, sec. 32), 888, 890, 944; appeals
from local courts (art. 5, sec. 24), 794,
798, 944; judicial officers,

Courts (cont.)

sions (art. 5, sec. 22), 798, 944;

judicial power vested in (art. 5, sec.

i), 448, 449-453, 760, 944; of equity,

testimony in, 85. See county courts,

county commissioners court, supreme

court.
Credit of state, not to be given (art. 3,

sec. 38), 83, 729, 944.

Debt, state, see appropriations and state
debt tax.

Distribution of powers (art. 2, sec. i),
55, 62-64, 837, 838, 944; no depart-
ment to exercise power of others (art.
2, sec. 2), 55, 836, 837, 944.

Double jeopardy, eminent domain (art.
13, sec. 11), 866, 944.

Due process of law (art. 13, sec. 8), 84,
732, 865, 944.

Dueling, punishment (art. 13, sec. 25),
191, 869, 871, 944; special oath con-
cerning (art. 13, sec. 26), 872, 944.

Elections, general, change in time of

(art. 5, sec. 9), 46, 612, 944.
Electors, privileges (art. 6, sec. 3), 609,

612, 944; exempt from militia duty

(art. 6, sec. 4), 609, 612, 944.
Eminent domain, see double jeopardy.
English language to be used (schedule;

sec. 18), 890,944.
Evidence, in chancery suits, 890, 896:

jury in libel suit (art. '13, sec. 24), 873;

944-
Executive power (art. 4, sec. 1), 45, 360.

734. 944-
Ex post facto laws (art. 13, sec. 17), 867

870, 944.

Freedom, .

General assembly, adjournment, (art. 3,
sec. 19), 304, 698, 944; apportion-
ment according to population (art. 3,
sec. 8), 334-33S> 944; fees and sala-

ioi6

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

General assembly (cont.)
ries, restrictions (art. 3,sec. 22), 304,
698, 944; general laws and divorce
(art. 3, sec. 32), 108, 720, 944; gen-
eral rules, punishment of members
(art. 3, sec. 15), 304, 697, 944; ineligi-
bility (art. 3, sec. 29), 309, 719, 944;
journal, yeas, nays (art. 3, sec. 13),

303, 697, 944; legislative power (art.
3, sec. 1), 44, 66, 19s, 284, 69J, 944;

members: apportionment by dis-
tricts (art. 3, sec. 40), 874-875, 879-
884, 944; compensation of (art. 3, sec.
24), 44, 45, 76, 84, 124, 30^308, 699,
944; disabilities of (art. 3, sec. 7), 83,
308, 700-702, 944; election of (art. 3,
sec. 2), 45, 285-288, 291-292, 695,
944; number of (art. 3, sec. 6), 71,
124-152, 153-158, 293-298, 302-303,
696, 944; pay (art. 3, sec. 25), 308,
699,944; privileges of (art. 3, sec. 17),

304, 694, 944;

officers of, quorum (art. 3, sec. 12),
303. 697, 944; open sessions, (art.3,
sec. 19), 304, 698, 944; procedure on
bills (art. 3, sec. 21), 195, 304, 698,
944; prohibition of special privileges
or exemptions (proposed section),
311.315-333.359-360,725; punish-
ment, power of (art. 3, sec. 18), 304,
698, 944;

qualifications: representatives (art.
3, sec. 3), 292, 695, 944; senators (art.
3, sec. 4), 292, 696, 944;

requirements for bills and acts (art.

3, sec. 23), 305, 698, 944; right of
protest (art. 3, sec. 14), 304, 697, 944;

senatorial and representative dis-
tricts: excess population (art. 3, sec.
10), 124, 153-157. 158,335.336-337.
350-353. 727. 944; formation (art. 3,
sec. 9). 48. 124. 335. 726, 944;

senators, terms of (art. 3, sec. 5),
45, 292, 696, 944; special sessions (art.

4, sec. 10), 393-403, 737, 944; time of
meeting (art. 3, sec. 11), 71, 84, 124,

General assembly (cont.)
303. 697. 944; vacancies (art. 3, sec.
16), 304, 697, 944.

Government, principles (art. 13, sec.
:8), 871, 944-

Governor, army and navy commander-
in-chief (art. 4, sec. 1 1), 403, 737, 944;
election (art. 4, sec. 2), 360, 735, 944;
filling vacancy (art. 4, sec. 20), 738,
944; messages to general assembly
(art. 4, sec. 7), 736, 944; oath (art. 4,
sec. 6), 736, 944; power to adjourn
general assembly (art. 4, sec. 13), 737,
944; power of appointment (art. 4,
sec. 12), 837, 944; power over other
officers (art. 4, sec. 9), 737, 944;
qualifications for (art. 4, sec. 4), 361-
375. 736, 944; residence, salary (art.

4, sec. 5), 45, 375-382. 384-387. 736.
944; succession to (art. 4, sec. 19),
738. 944; term of office (art. 4, sec.
3), 45, 84, 361, 735, 944; veto power
(art. 4,'sec. 21), 83, 404-442. 739. 944-

Grand jury (art. 13, sec. 10), 865, 866,
944-

Habeas corpus (art. 13, sec. 13), 866,

867, 944.
Homestead and exemption laws, 884.

Impeachment, officers liable to judg-
ment (art. 3, sec. 28), 719, 944;
officers subject to (art. 4, sec. 26), 74I,
944; power of (art. 3, sec. 27), 309,
702, 944-

Imprisonment for debt (art. 13, sec. 15),
867, 944.

Indebtedness, see state debt tax.

Indictment, see grand jury.

Internal inprovements, see corporation
(art. lo, sec. 6).

Judges, election, time of (art. 5, sec. 13),
84, 804, 805, 944; eligibility (art. 5,
sec. 1 1), 803, 804, 944; removal (art.

5, sec. 12), 806, 807, 944; salaries and

INDEXES

1017

Judges (cont.)

eligibility to other offices (art. 5, sec.

10), 71, 83, 801, 803, 944. See

supreme court.
Jurisdiction, see courts.
Jury, trial by (art. 13, sec. 6), 864, 944.
Justice, free and prompt (art. 13, sec.

12), 866, 944.
Justices of the peace (art. 5, sec. 17),

785-786, 787-793, 944.

Laws, codification and publication, 890-
896; style (art. 3, sec. 20), 306, 699,
944. See general assembly, special
legislation.

Legislative power (art. 3, sec. i), 44, 66,
19s, 284, 695, 944.

Legislature, see general assembly.

Lieutenant governor, compensation
(art. 4, sec. 17), 738, 944; election,
term, qualifications (art. 4, sec. 14),
4°3. 737. 944; rights of (art. 4, sec.
I5)> 403> 737i 944; succession to (art.
4, sec. 18), 404, 738, 944.

Life, liberty and property (art. 13, sec.
i), 83, 846, 944.

Lotteries, authorized by general assem-
bly (art. 3, sec. 35), 109, 721, 944.

Lucrative office, see offices.

Message, see governor.

Mileage, see general assembly, members:
compensation of.

Military, see civil power.

Militia, exemptions (art. 8, sec. 2), 191,
324, 613, 944; persons subject to
service (art. 8, sec. i), 324, 613, 944;
privileges (art. 8, sec. 6), 324, 613,944.
officers: commissioned by governor
(art. 8, sec. 5), 613, 944; election (art.
8, sec. 3), 613, 944; election of gener-
als (art. 8, sec. 4), 324, 613, 944.

Navy, see militia.

Negroes, immigration and emancipation
of in state (art. 14), 47, 201-228, 855-

Negroes (cont.)

863, 873, 944; restrictions in marriage
(proposed sections), 180, 871, 873.

Oath, officers (art. 3, sec. 30), 310, 729,
944-

Officers, county, removal of (art. 5, sec.
25), 804-806, 944; disqualification by
crime (art. 3, sec. 31), 720, 944; elec-
tion of not provided in constitution
(art. 5, sec. 23), 804, 805, 944; no life
term (proposed section), 251.

Offices, one lucrative office at a time
(proposed section), 201; qualifica-
tions (art. 6, sec. 7), 836, 944.

Pardon, power of (art. 4, sec. 8), 71
39i-293, 736, 944-

Penalties, proportioned to offense (art.
13, sec. 14), 867, 944.

Poll tax, see capitation.

Preamble, 837.

Press and speech, freedom of (art. 13,
sec. 23), 389, 872, 944.

Primogeniture, law prohibiting (pro-
posed section), 890.

Probate justice, (proposed section), 109.

Process, form of (art. 5, sec. 26), 798, 944.

Protest, see general assembly.

Revenue, see taxation.

Salaries and fees, see compensation.
Sale of lands, see special legislation.
Schedule (sec. 1-26), 944.
School fund, 170-185, 191, 289, 809,

898, 899, 925.
Seal of state (art. 4, sec. 25), 741, 944.
Search and seizure (art. 13, sec. 7), 864,

944-
Seat of government, change of (schedule

proposed section), 290.
Secretary of state (art. 4, sec. 22), 442-

444> 739-741; 944-
Sheriff, term of (art. 7, sec. 7), 71, 106,

250, 805-806, 944.

ioi8

ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Slavery and involuntary servitude (art.
13, sec. i6), 83, 867, 944.

Soldiers, quartering (art. 13, sec. 22),
872,944.

Sovereignty of the people (art. 13, sec.
2), 846-853, 871,944.

Speaker of the senate (art. 4, sec. 16),
738, 944-

Special legislation, prohibiting sale of
lands (art. 3, sec. 36), 310, 721, 944.

Speech, freedom, see press.

State's attorney (art. 5, sec. 28), 190,
193-191, 944-

State debt tax (art. 15), 48-50, 305, 457,
885, 928,929, 931-939, 944. See
appropriations and debt.

State treasurer (art. 4, sec. 24), 190,
514. 515. 741. 944-

Suffrage, disqualifications (art. 6, sec. 8),
609, 612, 944; qualifications (art. 6,
sec. i), 47, 105-106, 170, 515-518,
524-608, 611, 944; residence not lost
by absence from United States on
business of the state (art. 6, sec. 5),
609, 612, 944; residence of soldiers,
seamen and marines (art. 6, sec. 6),
609, 612, 944.

Suits against state (art. 3, sec. 34), 310,
720, 944.

Superintendent of public instruction
(common schools), 48, 899, 900-925,

Supreme court, appeals and writs of
error (art. 5, sec. 32), 888, 890, 944;

clerks: election of (art. 5, sec. 2i),
83, 806, 809, 944; terms, duties, com-
pensation of (art. 5, sec. 29), 83, 797,
798, 944;

judges: grand divisions for election
of, provided for (art. 5, sec. 3), 82,

Supreme Court (cont.)

456-484, 488, 743-759. 762-765, 887,
provision for altering (art. 5, sec. ^i),
889, 890, 944; named (art. 5, sec. 30),
887-890, 944; terms of (art. 5, sec. 4),
82,488,489,765.

jurisdiction (art. 5, sec. 5), 82, 454,
765, 944; members, quorum (art. 5,
sec. 2), 82, 454-456, 761,944; number
of cases tried, number of pending, 106,
1 10; places of meeting (art. 5, sec. 31),
888, 890, 944; salaries and eligibility
to other offices (art. 5, sec. 10), 71,
83, 802, 803; terms (art. 5, sec. 6),
489-499, 767, 799, 944; time of elec-
tion (art. 5, sec. 14), 804, 805, 944;
vacancies (art. 5, sec. 9), 801,
802.

Taxation, capitation tax (art. 9, sec. i),
45-71, 90-100, 611, 615-626, 809,
815-817, 944; corporate taxes (art. 9,
sec. 5), 638, 820, 944; exemptions
(art. 9, sec. 3), 633, 637, 816, 944;
(proposed section), 201; form of pay-
ment (proposed section), 635; powers
of general assembly (art. 9, sec. 6),
638, 820, 944; redemption from tax
sales (art. 9, sec. 4), 634, 819, 944;
uniform rule, special taxes (art. 9,
sec. 2), 70, 92, 106, 191, 192-195, 250,
627, 629-632, 814, 816, 871, 944.

Township organization (art. 7, sec. 6),
845, 944-

Veto power (art. 4, sec. 21), 83, 404-442,

739, 944-
Voting by ballot (art. 6, sec. 2), 48, 84,

608, 612, 944.

ion

ILUNOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS

Slavery and involuntary servitude (art.
13, sec. 16), 83, 867, 944.

Soldiers, quartering (art. 13, sec. 22),
872, 944.

Sovereignty of the people (art. 13, sec.
2), 846-853, 871, 944.

Speaker of the senate (art. 4, sec. 16),
738. 944-

Special legislation, prohibiting sale of
lands (art. 3, sec. 36), 310, 721, 944.

Speech, freedom, see press.

State's attorney (art. 5, sec. 28), 190,
793-797, 944-

State debt tax (art. 15), 48-50, 305, 457,
885, 928,929, 931-939, 944- See
appropriations and debt.

State treasurer (art. 4, sec. 24), 190,
514.515,741,944-

Suffrage, disqualifications (art. 6, sec. 8),
609, 6i2, 944; qualifications (art. 6,
sec. i), 47, 105-106, 170, 515-518,
524-608, 611, 944; residence not lost
by absence from United States on
business of the state (art. 6, sec. 5),
609, 612, 944; residence of soldiers,
seamen and marines (art. 6, sec. 6),
609, 612, 944.

Suits against state (art. 3, sec. 34), 310,
720, 944.

Superintendent of public instruction
(common schools), 48, 899, 900-925,

Supreme court, appeals and writs of
error (art. 5, sec. 32), 888, 890, 944;

clerks: election of (art. 5, sec. 2i),
83, 806, 809, 944; terms, duties, com-
pensation of (art. 5, sec. 29), 83, 797,
798, 944;

judges: grand divisions for election
of, provided for (art. 5, sec. 3), 82,

Supreme Court (cont.)
456-484, 488, 743-759, 762-765, 887,
provision for altering (art. 5, sec. 33),
889, 890, 944; named (art. 5, sec. 30),
887-890, 944; terms of (art. 5, sec. 4),
82,488,489,765.

jurisdiction (art. 5, sec. 5), 82, 454,
765, 944; members, quorum (art. 5,
sec. 2), 82, 454-456, 761,944; number
of cases tried, number of pending, 1 06,
no; places of meeting (art. 5, sec. 31),
888, 890, 944; salaries and eligibility
to other offices (art. 5, sec. 10), 71,
83, 802, 803; terms (art. 5, sec. 6),
489-499, 767, 799, 944; time of elec-
tion (art. 5, sec. 14), 804, 805, 944;
vacancies (art. 5, sec. 9), 801,
802.

Taxation, capitation tax (art. 9, sec. i),
45-7', 90-100, 611, 615-626, 809,
815-817, 944; corporate taxes (art. 9,
sec. 5), 638, 820, 944; exemptions
(art. 9, sec. 3), 633, 637, 816, 944;
(proposed section), 201; form of pay-
ment (proposed section), 635; powers
of general assembly (art. 9, sec. 6),
638, 820, 944; redemption from tax
sales (art. 9, sec. 4), 634, 819, 944;
uniform rule, special taxes (art. 9,
sec. 2), 70, 92, ro6, 191, 192-195, 250,
627, 629-632, 814, 816, 871, 944.

Township organization (art. 7, sec. 6),
845, 944.

Veto power (art. 4, sec. 21), 83, 404-442,

739, 944-
Voting by ballot (art. 6, sec. 2), 48, 84,

608, 612, 944.

I ° -Ii2 5Vfc S-:!k SK-" g Sk^ 2 g-^K^ S.". h'H

i O 0-73 xJ^^ 1

^"1

£ E S ?.i

i^&l

".is'Siiog coo's «2 "^^-S i2'55S a 5s <»

■§ 3=3-o||i2^-2i2 ^5>o:§>.|i;i»|:3'§^g ^stt^i'i^b'^ i?o>-j;3M

■^e E E E 6 S 6 H E E-^E E E E E-fS E E E E E E E^
gQQQQQClQQQQ^QQQPQ^QQDQQQQQ&

^S^

■"E S E E-?'-?'E-

■p-p E S E E E-

■lllllilliillll'i^lgaQaQ^^QllQllilQSQlQfHaa^

fc. c

5 o fe

&IS,„go

•?g

5^g..

a) o

§11 ]

41.1^'

i;^ ' S 2 2

IP I

9 c-i 2 c § §-

II o^i ii § r^ II . i o^^f-s fill fi i §1^ Im"^ s i"l||

> fe. ^ fe- k5 5 v:! ^ -^ .<S *i "i r'^ *s k- .y *g .<S .? ,? ^ .-te *g 's 45 n o r5 r°> x" fe n ►S >.> r^ r*", fe te

s:p:2^M^S§Sc3S.3oSS;tgSci!fofe

HOS^OffiWOO^^O

SSfc.lsfcfe'^fe;

fc Si 53J

SjUQjoIcjfcfecij'GoloaJajaj'UwaiciJ

3 c ^ t ri i II r^irri i-i g rra i g ill rii g s s ii^l^E E E |.|| E 1^1 E| ^^s ^

EE S

5^gS^2^0(

•^^z:z-z---^z

diill Hi illi J Jilliilliilli il rl|

^.U O M o-c

cfePl'sPlea

^ :5-^^£:i£--'i:i-^ .=: = <- £5 x^Sx^coDfcOSt<u;jX(^CjffiO<^

.■-■--^i:.^.t:.b.{i.^b..^

llir||||r!||E|pi

. r- CC". CC C O C vC O- OC — oc t- C

a. ^-2= -trSl

-;;; S2S-:

i 5

e.i >.^ §>E-S^-StS'.2ig-S 2 8ig 2.^^ Si ° S-S"-." °-S|.& 2.^:9-S &I 2 >.2|

'SEE

E-_s E-^

'SEE E-_s E •?£•?•? ip-

SrS-S'S-

•? -p E S i

?.S-^-^l

QpQ^QQ^Q^QQ^QQQQ^QlQ^^lQlQ^Q^Q^Q^iQ^iQQQ^^C''Df in

:ZWWZ2SZ2>2'Zt^2>266H>6>SMM>(2lsW'2Wt

; .-2 .tJ . .
;>0>2>W>WSrsZt4>

iililiil^llJJfilisililJrillllllltlillP'^*-

^ "" I |-| %%&■% E E E'|e ^bfe S S E-g ^-E'S E b'»

^^.^

,3 (£fc S hj f

1 "

Givens's

Mrs. Forsyth's
Campbell's
Chamblin's
Ky. House

S E S S E S
QQQQQQ

Waverley

Equality

Rock Island

Vandalia

McLeansboro

Ottawa

Morgan

Gallatin

Rock Island

Fayette

Hamilton

LaSalle

Farmer
Lawyer

Trader
Farmer

S'-sss:^

3^;?2S5

Ne\rton Cloud, President
H. W. Moore, Secretary
H. G. Reynolds, Asst. Sec.
Jas. T. Ewing, Asst. Sec.
J. A. Wilson, Doorkeeper
R. Woodruff, Asst. Doorkeeper

E -•-';

9h Ji-^

Sow'*.

l^°<3

" E.a2

> t3 rt °

(Ij «3 o.2—_
o S III
2 g S S"!

^"^■•a ;S.S^ SE2^8

.;§! If MUi

It" ^-sl init-
ios -siS ||g|§

2 •-'^ 5 ar,4> 5 .^ So
-"*^" S E^ -"fe§i«

g|& i:.2 -Bi.5.2

H§'S §«g- §5! = S^

III ^li af^^i

^^. "1.1 Hill
>§| ^=.- Si.= i'

;^.2|
300

OJ .-^ Br^-M _ ^ 0 S.a c ■"

l;c^-§

3 2'^.S — '

I1lc§l!%ll.il?r|

<uOBi cMo5""EcSs.Si

!l3illl3lMri

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Collections of the Illinois State Historical Library"

See other formats